11 ! ' 
jii" 


III! 


P 


im'mv 


|M   III  HI 

till!!  Hi   .1   .  f 

.  j.iul'  I 


iiil! 


,  f  (I'l  I   .11    I 
ill  :,■  11*1,!'  '< 

'  -'111  '!   I 

lii]  t  111  i' 
;M  l''i 


-7V 


^i-fi    I 


LIBRARY 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 

SANTA  BARBARA 


PRESENTED  BY 

JOHN  &  ANNA  GILLESPIE 


)i<yi'U-^ '  ^^'Ci.^.' , 


fr. 


■■Ui(,\''yiJ^ . 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcli  ive.org/details/biblicaltlieologyOOgouliala 


Neb)  Testament  f^antitjoolts 

EDITED  BY 
SHAILER    MATHEWS 


THE  BIBLICAL   THEOLOGY  OF 
THE   NEW   TESTAMENT 


•j^^y^ 


/IHE  BIBLICAL  THEOLOGY  OF 
THE  NEW  TESTAMENT 


BY 


EZRA   P.    GOULD,   D.D. 

AUTHOR  OF  "a  critical  AND  HXEGETICAL  COMMENTARY 
ON  THE  GOSPEL  OF  MARK" 


THE    MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

LONDON:  MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Ltd. 
1900 

All  Hghtt  rtttrved 


COPTBIGHT,  1900, 

By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY. 


J.  8.  Cuihing  k  Co.  —  Berwick  li  Smith 
Norwood  Mtii.  U.S.A. 


PREFACE 

The  author  hereby  makes  his  acknowledgments  to 
the  Editor  for  very  important  help  in  the  preparation 
of  this  book,  quite  out  of  the  line  of  his  required  work. 
Owing  to  the  very  severe  illness  of  the  author,  the 
editor  has  prepared  the  bibliographical  notes,  which 
are  not  only  difficult  of  preparation,  but  in  this  case 
extremely  helpful. 

The  material  for  the  note  on  justification  was  very 
kindly  contributed  by  Professor  R.  W.  Micou,  D.D., 
of  Alexandria  Theological  Seminary,  a  former  col- 
league of  the  author  at  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Divinity  School  in  Philadelphia,  and  by  Dr.  McGif- 
fert  of  Union  Theological  Seminary. 

This  book  is  the  result  of  studies  in  Introduction 
to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  pursued  by  the 
author  with  his  classes  in  the  Philadelphia  Divinity 
School.  In  these  lectures  he  undertook  to  find  his  way 
through  the  New  Testament,  just  as  the  critics  have 
found  a  way  for  us  through  the  Old  Testament.  Their 
success  in  this  work  in  the  Old  Testament  has  only 
made  more  conspicuous  the  failure  to  do  satisfactory 

work  of  the  same  kind  in  the  New  Testament. 

v 


vi  PREFACE 

The  author  sends  out  this  small  treatise  with  con- 
siderable diffidence,  but  also  with  some  confidence 
that  it  may  enable  students  to  do  what  he  set  out 
to  do ;  viz.  to  find  their  way  through  the  New 
Testament. 

E.  P.  GOULD. 

St.  Geobor's,  Nbw  York, 
June  20,  1900. 


CONTENTS 


PAOK 

Introduction 1 

•Presuppositions  —  Groups  of  New  Testament  books : 
Synoptic  Gospels,  teaching  of  our  Lord ;  early  chap- 
ters of  Acts,  early  teaching  of  the  Twelve ;  Paul's 
writings,  including  Galatians,  Romans,  1  and  2  Cor- 
inthians, Philippians,  Philemon,  and  possibly  1  and  2 
Thessalonians ;  later  writings  of  the  Twelve,  Synop- 
tics, James,  1  Peter,  Pauline,  and  Apocalypse,  Anti- 
Pauline  ;  Alexandrian  writings,  Colossians,  Ephesians, 
Pastoral  Epistles,  Hebrews,  2  Peter,  Jude,  and  Johan- 
nean  writings. 

PART  I 

TEACHING  OF  JESUS 

CHAPTER   I 
Introduction 7 

Source;  Synoptics,  not  fourth  Gospel  —  Origin  of 
Synoptics  apostolic,  but  not  early  apostolic  —  Subject 
of  teaching,  Kingdom  of  God  —  Jesus'  transformation 
of  the  current  idea. 

CHAPTER  II 

GoD 13 

Divine  unity  and  righteousness  taught  by  Judaism 
—  Jesus  adds  Divine   graciousness  —  God's  Father- 
hood—  A  King  who  serves  his  people  —  The  law  of 
love  —  This  law  exacting  as  well  as  gracious, 
vii 


vm  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  III 

PAOK 

The  Kingdom  of  Gtod 24 

Obedience  condition  of  menoibership — Agents  of  its 
enforcement:  the  truth,  self -propagating  power  of 
good,  and  the  sense  of  God  —  Law  liberalised,  but 
made  more  exacting  —  Emancipating  effect  of  this 
teaching — Jesus  belongs  in  the  line  of  prophets. 


CHAPTER  IV 

Jesus'  Estimate  of  Himself 34 

Jesus'  authority  representative  —  He  seeks  to  estab- 
lish the  Kingdom  of  God  —  His  power  derived  from 
God  —  Titles :  Son  of  Man  and  Son  of  God  ;  both 
Messianic  titles,  but  derived  from  his  consciousness 
of  relation  to  man  and  God. 


CHAPTER  V 

Jesus'  Conception  of  Man 40 

Man  a  sinner,  but  his  capacity  for  righteousness 
the  more  important  fact  —  Teaching  of  the  parables. 


CHAPTER  VI 

Doctrine  of  Last  Things 44 

Prediction  of  the  end  of  the  age,  not  of  the  world 
—  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  predicted  as  one  of  a 
continuous  series  of  judgments,  and  the  coming  of 
Jesus  in  connection  with  it  also  one  of  a  series  —  The 
final  end  not  judgment,  but  complete  redemption. 


CONTENTS  IX 

PAKT  II 

THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE 

PACK 

The  Apostles 61 

Difference  between  early  and  later  teaching — For- 
mer found  in  early  chapters  of  Acts  —  Contents  of 
teaching — Resurrection  and  exaltation  of  Jesus  — 
Difference  between  present  and  final  exaltation  — 
Difficulty  of  his  death  removed  by  resurrection  —  Re- 
version to  Jewish  Messianism  in  this  doctrine  of 
final  exaltation,  and  to  Jewish  ceremonialism  in 
worship  —  Summary, 

PAET  III 

THE  TEACHING  OF  PAUL 

CHAPTER  I 

Sin  and  the  Law 68 

Revolutionary  character  of  Paulinism  —  A  new 
righteousness  —  Involves  freedom  from  ceremonial 
law  —  This  liberalism  opposed  by  Jewish  church  — 
Argument  against  their  narrowness  involves  freedom 
from  entire  law  —  New  principle  of  righteousness, 
faith  —  Rendered  necessary  by  sin  —  Sin  universal, 
originates  in  primary  sin  of  Adam,  and  located  in  the 
flesh  —  Man  himself,  the  ego,  not  invaded  by  it. 

CHAPTER  II 

The  Righteousness  of  Faith 66 

This  righteousness  not  normal ;  inferior  to  legal 
righteousness,  but  real  —  Justification  not  a  judicial 


X  CONTENTS 

PA6S 

term  —  Faith  the  principle  of  righteousness  because  it 
connects  man  with  Christ,  or  before  Christ  with  God 

—  This  connection  with  the  crucified  Christ  —  His 
deatli  both  atoning  and  morally  curative,  but  espe- 
cially the  latter  —  Penalty  of  sin  physical  death,  from 
which  we  are  delivered  through  the  death  and  resur- 
rection of  Christ ;  and  spiritual  death,  from  which  we 
are  delivered  by  the  spiritual  working  of  the  same 
facts. 

CHAPTER  m 

The  Holt  Spirit  in  the  Work  of  Redemption  .         .      81 
Salvation  completed  with  our  Lord's  reappearance 

—  Pledge  of  this  in  this  world  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  —  Its  work  the  redemption  of  the  spirit  —  Iden- 
tification of  Christ  with  the  Spirit,  who  is  made  the 
Divine  emanation  incarnate  in  Jesus. 


CHAPTER  IV 

Completion  op  the  Work  of  Salvation  ...  86 
Salvation  completed  in  the  redemption  of  the  body 
—  Present  body  subject  to  decay  and  sin  —  New  body 
incorruptible  and  fitted  for  man's  higher  spiritual 
part  —  New  world  as  well  as  new  body  —  This  closes 
the  Messianic  reign,  and  Jesus  becomes  subject  to  the 
Father  —  This  result  to  take  place  within  that  gen- 
eration. 

CHAPTER  V 

The  Pauline  Christologt 92 

Paul  emphasises  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Jesus, 
not  his  life  —  Our  Lord  becomes  thus  a  mystical 
being,  coming  from  previous  heavenly  life — The  form 
of  this  heavenly  existence  the  Holy  Spirit — Jesua' 


CONTENTS  XI 


PAOB 


power  to  save  men  due  to  his  humanity,  not  to  his 
preexistence  —  Doctrine  of  our  Lord's  person  in  Phil, 
ii.  5-11  develops,  but  does  not  change,  the  doctrine 
of  the  earlier  epistles. 


PAKT  IV 

THE  LATER  APOSTOLIC  WRITINGS 

CHAPTER  I 
Authenticity  of  James  and  1  Peter     ....     102 

Liberalism  of  both  epistles  inconsistent  with  earlier 
apostolic  teaching,  but  provided  for  by  the  change  in 
that  teaching  shown  especially  in  the  Synoptical 
Gospels. 

CHAPTER  II 

The  Teaching  of  James 110 

Christian  characterised  by  possession  of  the  word 
of  truth  —  Doctrine  contains  answer  to  the  question, 
what  he  shall  do  with  this  word  —  Its  controversial 
use  deprecated,  and  even  hearing  and  believing,  or 
confession,  without  obedience  insufficient  —  True  wor- 
ship consists  in  this  obedience  —  Undue  respect  for 
the  rich  and  the  controversial  spirit  —  Justification  by 
faith  and  works,  not  by  faith  without  works  —  Doc- 
trine of  a  law  of  freedom,  not  of  freedom  from  law  — 
This  freedom  derived  from  view  of  the  Divine  gra- 
ciousness — Jesus  the  object  of  a  faith,  the  fruit  of 
which  is  the  works  of  the  kingdom  of  God. 

CHAPTER  III 

The  Teaching  of  1  Peter 119 

Epistle  addressed  to  the  Gentiles  —  The  general 
subject  the  hope  of  the  early  Church  of  the  early  reap- 


XU  CONTENTS 

FA6K 

pearance  of  our  Lord,  based  on  his  resurrection  — 
Condition  meantime  that  of  sufferer  in  a  hostile  world 
—  Appeal  for  righteousness  drawn  from  present 
condition  of  suffering  and  the  future  hope  —  Warning 
against  sin  which  will  justify  the  world's  hostility  — 
The  hope  belongs  only  to  those  who  endure  suffering 
in  the  spirit  of  Christ  —  Redemption  through  the 
death  of  Christ  from  sin  itself,  not  primarily  from 
penalty  —  Redemption  corporate,  not  merely  indi- 
vidual —  The  new  life,  begotten  and  nourished  by  the 
word  of  God —  Repetition  of  Pauline  doctrine  of  Christ 
as  an  indwelling  power,  involving  his  exaltation. 

CHAPTER  IV 
The  Apocalypse 126 

The  extreme  Anti-Paulinism  and  general  extemal- 
ism  of  the  book  —  Difficulty  of  associating  the  book 
with  the  Apostle  John  or  with  the  fourth  Gospel  — 
Contents  —  Messianism  ;  element  of  revenge  ;  uni- 
versalism  ;  Messianic  salvation — Death  of  Christ  em- 
phasised, but  the  expiatory  element  eliminated.  Our 
Lord  called  the  "Lamb,"  but  given  the  cruel  quali- 
ties of  a  lion  —  Traces  of  Paulinism  and  Alexandrian- 
ism  indicate  composite  authorship. 


PAKT  V 

THE  NON-JOHANNEAN  WRITINGS  OF  THE 
ALEXANDRIAN  PERIOD 

CHAPTER  I 

Ephesians  akd  Colossians 132 

Natural  that  Alexandrianism  should  replace  Paulin- 
ism in  the  Gentile  churches  —  Denial  of  Pauline 
authorship  of  Ephesians  and  Colossians  makes  them 
pseudonymous.      Difference  from  Pauline  writings, 


CONTENTS  xm 

PAGB 

first,  in  style ;  and  second  in  speculative  method  — 
False  gnosis  subordinating  Jesus  to  angels  replaced 
with  true  gnosLs  exalting  Jesus  —  This  gnosis  Alexan- 
drian —  Jesus  appears  in  it  as  the  fulness  and  recon- 
ciliation of  all  things — Faith  in  hira  replaces  asceticism 
of  false  gnosis  —  Ephesians  subordinates  controversial 
purpose  of  this  doctrine,  and  emphasises  the  unity  of 
all  things  secured  by  it  —  Due  not  to  Christ's  place 
in  redemption,  but  in  creation  —  These  writings  pre- 
suppose Paulinism  and  come  next  to  that  in  develop- 
ment of  New  Testament  thought  —  Emphasis  of  the 
Church  idea. 


CHAPTER  n 

The  Pastoral  Epistles 142 

Emphasis  of  ecclesiastical  authority  —  Beginning  of 
creeds — Authority  appealed  to  against  the  false  gnos- 
ticism and  legalism  appearing  in  Ephesians  and 
Colossians  —  Moral  teaching  urgent,  but  perfunctory 

—  Christology  simple  —  Doctrine  of  salvation  ethical 

—  Simplicity  a  reaction  from_  doctrinal  excess  —  Ad- 
vanced ecclesiasticism. 


CHAPTER  m 

2  Peter  and  Jude 161 

2  Peter  not  by  the  same  author  as  1  Peter  —  Em- 
phasis of  knowledge  —  Knowledge  has  for  its  object 
Jesus  Christ,  and  for  its  source  the  eye-witness  of  the 
apostles  —  Testimony  of  prophetic  scriptures  —  Epis- 
tle a  pseudonymous  prophecy  against  antinomian 
heresy  and  against  doubt  of  Lord's  reappearance  — 
Christology  simple  and  doctrine  of  salvation  ethical 

—  Doctrine  of  authority  the  modified  view  of  Origen 

—  Indications  of  late  date. 


XIV  CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  IV 

PAOE 

Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 100 

Pauline  authorship  discredited  —  Alexandrianism  of 
epistle  appears  in  its  allegorical  interpretation,  its  doc- 
trine of  types,  and  the  application  of  these  to  prove 
superiority  of  Christianity  to  Judaism  —  Object  of  the 
epistle  to  lead  its  readers  to  substitute  sacrifice  of 
Jesus  for  the  Jewish  sacrifices  —  Superiority  of  the 
Son  over  angels  and  Moses  and  the  Jewish  priesthood 
—  Comparison  between  Christ's  high  priesthood  and 
the  Jewish  priesthood  —  Contrast  between  the  taber- 
nacles belonging  to  the  two  systems  —  Merging  of  the 
priestly  in  the  prophetic  idea  —  Rationale  of  the 
Incarnation. 


PAET  VI 
TEE  JOHANNEAN  WRITINGS 

CHAPTER  I 

The  Fourth  Gospel  and  the  Synoptics       .        .        .     174 
Contrast  between  the  Synoptic  and  the  Johannean 
representation  of  our  Lord's  teaching  —  Parallels  be- 
tween the  fourth  Gospel  and  the  Synoptics. 

CHAPTER  II 

The  Johannean  Teaching 182 

General  subject  our  Lord  himself ;  particular  sub- 
ject his  Messianic  position  —  Alexandrian  meaning  of 
"Son  of  God" — Incarnation  involves  humanising 
of  the  Logos  —  Supernaturalism  in  Jesus  attributed 
not  to  the  Logos,  but  to  the  Father,  or  the  Spirit  as 


CONTENTS  XV 


the  agent  of  the  Father  —  Christ's  memory  of  his 
preexistent  state  —  Jesus'  equality  with  God  results 
from  his  Sonship  —  The  work  of  our  Lord  his  gift 
to  men  of  eternal  life  proceeding  from  himself  — 
Eternal  life  possible  only  to  those  who  have  an 
aflSnity  for  the  truth  —  Their  attitude  to  Jesus  depend- 
ent on  their  previous  attitude  toward  preceding  truths 

—  Jesus  identified  with  the  various  elements  which 
feed  life  —  The  moral  and  not  the  expiatory  view  of 
his  sacrifice  Involved  in  this  —  Faith  in  Jesus  made  to 
signify  a  belief  in  the  eternal  truth  of  things  and  a 
belief  in  God  —  Difference  between  the  Synoptical 
emphasis  of  obedience  as  the  work  of  God  and  the 
Johannean  emphasis  of  faith  as  the  work  of  God  — 
No  opposition  of  faith  and  works  —  Meagre  list  of 
virtues  —  The  love  commended  is  that  of  the  brethren 

—  Fourth  Gospel  the  Gospel  of  the  contemplative  life 

—  Its  defectiveness  —  Fulness  of  statement  about  the 
Holy  Spirit  —  Last  things  not  emphasised,  but  brief 
statement  of  them  coincides  with  general  New  Testa- 
ment statement  including  their  nearness — The  exalta- 
tion of  our  Lord's  person  in  this  book  modified  by  its 
Alexandrianism  —  The  Logos  the  principle  of  iacarna- 
tion  in  God  and  the  Spirit  the  principle  of  immanence 

—  Pessimistic  view  of  the  world. 


CHAPTER  ni 

First  Epistle  op  John 205 

Authorship  that  of  the  fourth  Gospel  —  Subject  of 
the  epistle  the  revelation  of  God  in  Christ,  and  the 
obligation  which  this  lays  on  the  Christian  —  Christ's 
death  purifying  and  propitiatory  —  Christians  are  not 
to  love  the  world,  which  is  hopelessly  evil  —  Anti- 
christs—  Heresy  taught  by  them  identified  with  Ce- 
rinthianism — Antinomianism  as  well  as  false  belief 
of  these  heretics  —  Men  origiually  children  of  the 


XVI  CONTENTS 

PAOI 

flesh  and  pass  from  this  into  the  state  of  sons  either 
of  God  or  of  the  devil — Bias,  however,  toward  the 
latter  —  Love  identified  with  God  —  The  sin  unto 
death  —  The  insistence  on  a  coiTect  belief  in  regard 
to  Jesus'  person  indicates  an  advanced  stage  of  the 
gnostic  faith  and  a  late  date. 

Sdhhart 213 

Index 219 


THE   BIBLICAL   THEOLOGY   OF 
THE   NEW   TESTAMENT 


THE  BIBLICAL  THEOLOGY  OF  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT 


INTRODUCTION 

THE  PRESUPPOSITIONS  OF  THE  THEOLOGY  OF  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT 

Biblical  Theology  does  not  deal  with  the  teaching  Biblical 
of  the  Bible  as  a  whole,  but  with  the  doctrinal  contents  theology, 
of  each  book  or  set  of  books.  It  presupposes  that  the 
Bible  is  not  a  single  book,  but  a  collection  of  books, 
and  that  these  books,  while  they  have  a  certain  very 
important  unity,  owing  to  the  presence  in  them  of  a 
divine  element,  are  yet  different  from  each  other  in  the 
details  of  their  doctrinal  teaching.  This  is  quite  the 
most  important  fact  remaining  to  be  learned  in  regard 
to  the  Bible,  that  it  is  not  a  homogeneous  unit,  but 
a  collection  of  more  or  less  heterogeneous  units. 
Among  the  weighty  results  of  modern  biblical  study, 
this  is  preeminent. 

Biblical  Theology  has  for  its  foundations.  Criticism  Its  founda- 
and  Exegesis.  Inasmuch  as,  for  the  purposes  of  this  *^°"^' 
study,  the  Bible  is  divided  into  groups  of  books,  the 
very  first  thing  is  to  determine  the  group  to  which 
each  book  belongs.  By  ascribing  to  Paul  books  which 
do  not  belong  to  him,  we  enlarge  the  circle  of  his  teach- 
ing unduly,  and  Pauliuism  proper  is  not  so  much 
enlarged  as  debased.  Then,  there  is  no  place  where  the 
difficulty  of  running  before  you  are  sent  has.  been 
shown  so  strikingly  as  in  the   attempts   of  men  to 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Source  of the 
variety  of 
elements 
in  N.  T. 
theology. 


1.  The 
antagonism 
of  Priest  and 
Prophet. 


5 


2.  The 
antagonism 
of  Prophet 
and  Scribe. 


5 


teach  Biblical  Theology,  who  are  not  first  and  foremost 
interpreters. 

The  variety  of  the  elements  which  enter  into  the 
New  Testament  teachings,  is  rooted  in  the  older 
Jewish  literature.  We  have  in  that  preceding  litera- 
ture a  series  of  contrasts,  which  have  passed  over  into 
the  New  Testament  literature,  and  which  help  us  to 
divide  the  books  into  their  different  classes.  These 
contrasts  are  as  follows :  — 

1.  TTie  antagonism  of  Priest  and  Prophet.  The 
priest  in  religion  represents  the  attempt  to  win  God's 
favour,  or  to  avert  his  displeasure,  by  something  be- 
sides obedience  to  his  will,  and  especially  by  sacrifices 
and  offerings,  and  various  ceremonial  forms.  He  rep- 
resents also  the  demand  that  these  functions,  being  of 
the  nature  of  mysteries,  be  performed  by  a  sacred 
class.  The  prophet  rejects  the  whole  system,  and 
insists  that  nothing  is  required  of  man,  except  right- 
eousness toward  God  and  his  fellow-man,  and,  if  he  is 
not  living  righteously,  that  he  begin  immediately.  Man 
belongs  to  a  spiritual  order,  and  his  obligations  are 
inward,  not  external.  Singularly  enough,  this  antag- 
onism of  two  things  lying  almost  beside  each  other  in 
the  Old  Testament  has  been  often  overlooked,  and 
they  have  been  taken  as  coordinate  parts  of  the  one 
Judaism.  In  their  transfer  to  the  New  Testament, 
there  is  the  same  apparent  coordination,  and  the  same 
real  antagonism. 

2.  TJie  antagonism  of  Prophet  and  Scribe.  This 
antagonism  is  so  generally  recognised  in  the  Gospels 
as  to  need  no  argument  here,  only  a  statement  of  the 
character  of  the  two  contrasted  forces  in  religion.  The 
prophet  is  the  man  who  sees  the  spiritual  side  of 
things,  and  has  courage  and  utterance  to  impress  it  on 
his  generation.  He  has  these  gifts  because  he  has  the 
vision  of  God,  and  hears  his  voice  condemning  the 


PRESUPPOSITIONS  3 

sins  of  the  prophet's  own  generation.  The  scribe  on 
the  other  hand  represents  the  idea  that  God  ceased  to 
speak  to  men  at  some  time  in  the  past,  and  he  therefore 
turns  to  the  past  for  religious  ideas.  He  is  the  tradi- 
tionalist, and  like  Lot's  wife,  ever  looking  back,  is 
changed  into  a  pillar  of  stone.  His  instrument,  more- 
over, is  a  drag-net,  and  not  a  divining-rod.  All  canon- 
ical scripture  is  alike  to  him;  the  Levitical  law  as  well 
as  the  prophets  who  condemn  it,  except  that  being 
himself  without  the  prophetic  spirit,  he  prefers 
Levitism. 

3.  The  contrast  of  Prophet  and  Philosopher.  These  3.  The 
two  are  not  exactly  opposed,  but  occupy  different  p^ro^^^ife* ,^fi<j 
spheres.  The  prophet  is  concerned  only  with  that  Philosopher, 
side  of  divine  or  human  being  that  eventuates  in  con- 
duct. For  instance,  he  dwells  on  the  spiritual  side  of 
man,  but  the  incarnation  of  the  spirit,  and  its  origin, 
being  only  speculative  in  their  interest,  he  leaves 
unsearched.  The  speculative  side  of  Judaism  is  not 
Jewish,  but  comes  only  with  the  contact  of  Jew  and 
Greek  in  Alexandrianism.  And  the  new  element  which 
it  introduces  is  a  good  example  of  the  contrast  of 
philosopher  and  prophet.  The  Jewish  Scriptures 
reveal  the  fact  of  creation.  Alexandrianism  discusses 
the  process,  starting  with  Platonic  dualism  and  intro- 
ducing the  Logos  as  the  agent  of  the  otherwise  impos- 
sible creation.  Paul's  discussion  of  the  origin  of  sin  is 
another  example  of  the  attempt  to  rationalise  what  the 
prophet  treats  merely  as  a  tremendous  spiritual  fact. 
Now  the  note  of  inspiration,  with  its  accompaniment 
of  authority,  belongs  only  to  the  prophetic  side  of 
Scripture.  Paul's  discussion  of  sin  falls  into  two  parts, 
a  description  of  the  consciousness  of  sin  in  a  man  of  abso- 
lutely unique  moral  earnestness,  and  a  rationale  of  sin 
as  a  universal  fact.  In  the  one,  he  interests  me  greatly, 
but  only  in  the  other  does  he  speak  with  authority. 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


i.  The 
growth  and 
contrasts  of 
the  Mes- 
sianic idea. 


The  five 
historical 
groups  of 
the  N.  T. 
literature. 


1.   The 

Synoptic 
Gospels. 


4.  The  growth  and  contrasts  of  the  Messianic  idea. 
The  idea  of  which  Messianism  is  the  final  form,  is  that 
of  the  coming  greatness  of  the  people  of  God.  After 
the  establishment  of  the  Davidic  dynasty,  this  destiny 
came  to  be  identified  with  that  of  the  Davidic  line. 
After  the  exile,  it  took  the  form  of  deliverance  from 
the  different  powers  to  which  the  Jews  were  succes- 
sively subject,  and  finally  was  expected  at  the  hands  of 
a  mysterious  heroic  king  in  the  Davidic  line.  This  final 
form  is  that  of  the  Jewish  Messiah  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment time.  These  are  the  particulars :  the  general  idea 
is  that  of  material  greatness  as  the  privilege  and  destiny 
of  the  people  of  God.  But  meantime,  the  actual  hard 
fortune  of  the  people,  and  especially  of  its  best  class, 
was  teaching  a  different  ideal  of  national  greatness, 
which  finds  expression  in  the  Deutero-Isaiah.  His 
Servant  of  Jehovah  is  just  this  pious  remnant,  this 
spiritual  elite  of  the  nation,  and  he  suffers  because  he. 
is  possessed  of  this  superior  goodness,  and  in  order  to 
deliver  the  sinful  majority.  There  is  here  the  glim- 
mering of  a  great  truth,  that  to  be  the  people  of  God 
is  the  distinctive  greatness  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and 
that  to  suffer  in  that  character  is  the  culmination  of 
the  greatness. 

This  contrast  is  the  final  shape  in  which  the  spirit- 
ual form  of  the  religious  idea  is  brought  into  conflict 
with  its  various  opposites. 

For  the  purpose  of  the  historical  study  necessitated 
by  Biblical  Theology,  the  books  of  the  New  Testament 
are  divisible  into  the  following  groups  :  — 

1.-  The  Synoptic  Gospels,  containing  the  teaching  of 
our  Lord.  As  we  shall  see  hereafter,  these  writings 
have  to  be  considered,  not  only  with  regard  to  the  pur- 
pose of  Jesus  as  the  original  source  of  this  teaching, 
but  also  with  regard  to  the  purpose  of  the  evangelists 
themselves.     But  their  importance  as  a  valid  record  of 


PRESUPPOSITIONS  6 

our  Lerd's  teaching  is  vastly  greater  than  as  a  record 
of  tlie  purposes  of  their  authors. 

2.  The  early  teaching  of  the  Twelve,  of  which  the  main  2.  The  early 
record  is  the  discourses  in  the  early  chapters  of  the  the^^wlive. 
Acts.     These  chapters  show  us  a  lapse  on  the  part  of 

the  Twelve  from  our  Lord's  teaching  into  Jewish  Mes- 
sianism,  while  Paul  in  Galatians  shows  us  their  lapse 
from  our  Lord's  liberalised  treatment  of  the  law,  back 
into  Mosaism. 

3.  Paul's  writings,  containing  the  earliest  protest  3.  Paul's 
against  this  lapse  into  Mosaism,  but  proclaiming  also  ^"^i^^^e*- 
freedom  from  law  as  such.      These  writings  include 
Galatians,  Komans,  1  and  2  Corinthians,  Philippians, 

and  Philemon,  and  perhaps  1  and  2  Thessalonians. 

4.  The  later  writings  of  the  Twelve,  containing  their  4.  The  later 
answer  to  Paul's  announcement  of  freedom  from  law  ^e  Twelve, 
as  such,  and  showing  that  the  law  itself,  the  real  law 

as  distinguished  from  Mosaism,  is  a  law  of  freedom. 
This  group  includes  the  Synoptics,  which  are  written 
to  show  Jesus'  teaching  about  this  matter,  James, 
and  1  Peter.  The  Apocalypse  is  an  anti-Pauline  writing 
of  the  same  period. 

6.    Tlie  writings  of  the  Alexandrian  period.     Alexan-  5.  The  writ- 
drianism  is  Judaism  modified  by  its  contact  with  Hel-  Alexandrian 
lenism.     Christianity  became  under  its  influence,  first,  period. 
an  angelology,  involving  a  depreciation  of  our  Lord's 
person:    and  secondly,  a  rehabilitation  of  the  Logos 
doctrine,  involving  the  exaltation  of  the  person  of 
Jesus   by  making  him   an  incarnation  of  the  Logos. 
These  writings  include  (1)  Colossians,  Ephesians,  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  Hebrews,  2  Peter,  Jude ;  and  (2)  the 
Johannean  writings. 

The  division  thus  made  between  these  two  groups 
of  writings  is  one  rather  of  author  than  of  general 
philosophical  spirit.  In  this  the  entire  group  is  at 
one.     The  point  of  view,  however,  is  markedly  dif- 


6  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ferent  as  regards  doctrine  and,  in  addition,  the  ecclesi- 
astical element  is  less  evident  in  the  Johannean  than 
in  most  of  the  other  Alexandrian  writings  of  the  canon. 
For  this  reason  the  Johannean  literature  is  treated  as 
a  separate  division. 


PART   I 

TEACHING  OF  JESUS  AS  EEOOEDED  IN  THE 
SYNOPTIO  GOSPELS 


CHAPTER  I 

INTRODUCTION 

It  may  be  asked  why  this  teaching  is  sought  in  the 
Synoptics,  and  not  also  in  the  fourth  Gospel.     All  of  The 
them  are  Gospels,  and  all  of  them  combine  more  or  Synoptics  as 

IT  •  1         I  •       ■  mi       sources  of 

less  actual  discourse  with  sub3ective  elements.  The  the  teaching 
answer  is,  that  in  the  Synoptics  actual  discourse  pre-  °*  Jesus, 
dominates  and  subjective  elements  are  minor  and 
incidental,  while  in  John  the  subjective  element  pre- 
dominates. Proof  of  this  is  to  be  found  (a)  in  the 
close  resemblance  between  the  discourse  of  Jesus  in 
the  fourth  Gospel  and  the  other  Johannean  writings ; 
(6)  in  the  difference  between  the  Synoptics  and  John 
in  important  matters,  such  as  the  time  of  Jesus' 
announcement  of  himself  as  the  Messiah,  in  which 
probability  is  with  the  Synoptics ;  (c)  in  the  supremacy 
and  absoluteness  of  the  teaching  in  the  Synoptics. 

As  to  the  origin  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  tradition  ^ 
tells  us  that  Peter  rehearsed  the  story  of  Jesus*  life  Origin  of  the 
to  Mark,  who  put  it  into  written  form.     Also  that  Synoptics. 
Matthew  wrote  the  Logia,  or  Discourses  of  our  Lord, 
in  Hebrew  (Aramaic).     These  are  the  two  sources  of 

1  See  especially  Eusebius,  Church  History,  iii,  39,  and  vl,  14. 

7 


8  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

our  present  Gospels,  ISIark's  account  being  identical 
with  our  Mark,  and  the  main  part,  the  trunk  of  the 
other  two  Gospels,  while  the  Logia  of  Matthew  is  the 
source  of  the  supplementary  part  of  Matthew  and 
Luke.^ 

But  the  notion  that  the  Gospels  are  the  product  of 
tradition,  or  are  the  story  frequently  told  by  Peter 
in  his  preaching,  and  finally  written  out  by  Mark ;  or, 
indeed,  that  this  story  was  in  any  sense  familiar  to 
the  primitive  Church,  is  contradicted  by  what  we  know 
of  the  attitude  of  the  Twelve,  and  of  the  church  at 
Jerusalem  toward  the  liberal  notions  of  the  Synoptics. 
The  primitive  Church  was  Judaistic  in  its  belief;  its 
Messiah  was  Jewish,  and  its  legalism  was  not  that  of 
the  Prophets ;  not  even  of  the  written  law,  but  of  the 
traditional  law  —  that  is,  was  Pharisaic.^  Its  attitude 
toward  Paul  on  the  one  hand  and  James  on  the  other, 
as  well  as  the  traditions  of  the  extreme  legalism  of 
James,  are  a  sufficient  indication  of  this.'  On  the 
contrary,  the  Gospels  are  anti-Judaistic  in  their  teach- 
ing, declaring  the  oral  law,  and  parts  of  the  written 

^  For  a  general  discussion,  see  Bruce,  in  Expositor's  Greek 
Testament;  Stanton,  Art.  "Gospels,"  in  Hastings'  Dictionary 
of  the  Bible;  Sanday,  Arts,  in  Expositor  1891,  on  "A  Survey 
of  the  Synoptic  Question"  ;  Gould,  Commentary  on  Mark, 
xliv-xlix ;  Woods,  Studia  Biblica,  II,  59-104.  The  oral  tradition 
theory  is  set  forth  by  Wright,  Composition  of  the  Four  Gospels, 
and  Westcott,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels;  the 
two-document  theory,  by  Holtzmann,  Einleitung  in  das  N.T., 
and  Weiss,  Manual  of  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.  Other  works 
covering  the  subject  are  Ililgenfeld,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T. ; 
Zahn,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T. ;  Godet,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.  ; 
Gospel  Collection  and  St.  Matthew;  Badham,  TTie  Formation 
of  the  Gospels.  For  full  discussion,  see  Bacon,  Introduction,  in 
this  Series. 

2  See,  for  instance.  Acts  21 :  20. 

*  These  traditions  as  to  James  as  given  by  Hegesippus  are 
to  be  found  in  Eusebius,  Church  History,  ii,  23. 


INTRODUCTION 


law,  to  be  human  traditions.  At  the  same  time,  they 
are  very  strict  in  their  enforcement  of  the  real  law  of 
God,  insisting  that  obedience  to  that  is  the  one  condi- 
tion, in  fact  the  real  meaning  of  membership  in  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  Such  teaching  as  this,  or  writ- 
ings embodying  such  teachings,  could  not  have  grown 
in  the  soil  of  a  Judaistic  Church,  nor  could  that  Church 
be  nourished  by  such  teaching.  But  Peter  in  the  early 
period  was  Judaistic,  not  anti-Judaistic,  and  hence  was 
not,  in  that  period,  the  source  of  these  anti-Judaistic 
writings.  They  are  Pauline  in  their  opposition  to  the 
Levitical  law,  and  anti-Pauline  in  their  insistence  on 
obedience  to  the  real  law  as  the  principle  of  righteous- 
ness and  the  condition  of  favour  with  God.  The  one 
position  is  as  clearly  marked  as  the  other,  and  both  are 
equally  intentional,  reflecting  the  status  of  the  writer, 
as  well  as  the  Master  whose  teaching  he  records. 

On  the  other  hand,  so  trustworthy  and  sympathetic 
a  report  must  have  come  from  the  circle  of  the  Twelve. 
The  tradition  of  Petrine  authorship  is  correct,  but  it 
is  a  later,  a  converted,  Peter,  who  had  been  moved  by 
what  seemed  to  be  the  error  in  both  the  Jewish  and 
the  Pauline  interpretation  of  the  Gospel  to  recall  the 
words  of  Jesus  as  the  corrective  of  both.  This  is 
equally  true  of  the  Logia  of  Matthew,  which  is  the 
supplementary  source  of  our  present  Matthew  and 
Luke.  Matthew,  as  the  only  publican  among  the 
Twelve,  would  be  specially  fitted  to  report  the  parts 
of  Jesus'  teaching  antagonistic  to  strict  Pharisaism, 
and  at  the  same  time,  his  position  among  the  Twelve 
would  make  the  early  publication  of  such  a  collection 
of  sayings  improbable. 

On  the  whole,  this  result  of  a  careful  induction  of 
the  New  Testament  facts  is  eminently  satisfactory. 
It  makes  Paul  the  beginning  of  the  movement  in  the 
New  Testament  Church  toward  a  true  understanding 


The  Gospel 
of  Mark  not 
from  the 
Jerusalem 
church. 


The  Synop- 
tics not  the 
products  of 
Paulinism. 


Yet  both 
Mark  and 
the  Logia 
are  apos- 
tolic. 


Summary : 
the  relative 
significance 
of  Peter, 
Paul,  and 
Jesus. 


10  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

of  Jesus'  position,  but  by  no  means  the  end.  He  did 
not  lead  the  Church  back  to  that  position,  but  he  was 
the  means  of  stirring  up  the  original  apostles  to  do 
that  work.  Secondarily,  it  is  Peter,  and  not  Paul,  who 
restores  to  Christianity  its  proper  balance ;  and  prima- 
rily it  is  neither  Paul  nor  Peter,  but  Jesus  himself, 
since  Peter  is  able  to  accomplish  it  by  a  sympathetic 
report  of  our  Lord's  teaching ;  i.  e.,  our  Gospel  of  Mark. 
The  King-  The  central  subject  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  as  it  is 

dom  of  God.  recorded  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  is  the  Kingdom  of 
God.  The  importance  of  this  term  is  shown  (1)  by 
the  fact  that  whenever  the  teaching  of  Jesus  is 
summed  up  in  a  single  phrase,  the  phrase  is  the 
"  Kingdom  of  God " ;  ^  (2)  by  the  readiness  with 
which  special  subjects  range  themselves  under  this 
general  head.  It  is  assumed,  evidently,  that  this  sub- 
ject will  be  understood,  that  it  is  familiar  to  Jesus' 
audiences.  It  is  necessary  to  consider  this  statement 
in  some  detail.  Among  the  Jews'*  the  kingdom  of 
The  God  meant  (a)  the  supremacy  of  Israel  as  the  people 

thou^ght*"  of  God;  (6)  the  repentance  of  Israel,  since  their  sin 
was  what  prevented  their  ascendency;  (c)  the  inter- 
vention of  God,  since  their  fall  was  due  to  his  with- 
drawal ;  (d)  the  appearance  of  a  king  in  the  Davidic 
line,  in  whom  the  national  hopes  were  to  be  realised ; 

1  Mat.  4  :  23  ;  9  :  35  ;  24 :  14  ;  Mk.  1 :  14,  15  ;  Lk.  4  :  43  ;  8:1; 
16 :  10. 

2  See  Schiirer,  Jewish  People  in  the  Time  of  Christ,  Pt.  II, 
II,  154-187 ;  Wendt,  Teaching  of  Jesus,  I,  33-89 ;  Mathews, 
New  Testament  Times  in  Palestine,  Ch.  13 ;  Weber,  Judische 
Theologie;  Schiiltz,  0.  T.  Theology,  II,  197,  sq.,  354  sq.  ;  Issel, 
Eeich  Gottes,  7-26  ;  Baldensperger,  Das  Selbstbewusstsein  Jesu, 
3-99  ;  Scnedermann,  Die  Israelitische  Vorstelhmg  vom  Konig- 
reiche  Gottes  als  Voraussetzung  der  Verkundigung  und  Lehre 
Jesu  ;  Goodspeed,  Israel's  Messianic  Hope  (which  contains  an 
admirable  bibliography  and  is  the  best  historical  treatment  of 
the  subject). 


INTRODUCTION 


11 


(e)  the  idealising  of  the  Messiah,  whose  appearance 
was  to  be  sudden  and  mysterious,  and  who  would 
concentrate  in  himself  the  national  glory;  (/)  the 
inclusion  of  other  nations  in  the  kingdom,  partly  by 
conversion,  partly  by  conquest.  Of  these  (a)  and  (d) 
are  the  generic  and  dominant  elements. 

The  kingdom  of  God  is  fundamental  in  the  teaching 
of  Jesus  by  virtue  of  his  claim  to  be  the  Messianic  king; 
involving  as  it  does  the  announcement  that  the  king- 
dom was  about  to  be  established.^  But  it  is  only  the 
essential  idea  that  is  retained  by  him,  the  elements 
that  enter  into  it  being  all  more  or  less  transformed. 
It  is  this  transformation  which  makes  it  necessary  for 
him  to  occupy  so  much  time  over  the  subject.  In 
place  of  the  supremacy  of  the  people  of  God  is  put 
the  supremacy  of  God.  In  place  of  a  national  or 
racial  people  of  God  is  put  the  people  who  possess 
certain  qualities,  such  as  humility,  gentleness,  poverty 
(of  heart),  and  the  like.  That  is,  the  kingdom  is 
idealised  and  made  ethical.  It  is  those  who  are  in- 
wardly subject  to  God  who  constitute  his  kingdom. 
It  is  in  the  interest  of  this  spiritual  kingdom  that 
God  intervenes,  and  his  intervention  is  of  the  kind 
that  the  spirituality  of  the  kingdom  demands.  The 
object  is  not  to  preserve  its  members,  not  even  its 
king,  from  outward  evil,  or  to  subject  hostile  powers 
to  them;  but  to  procure  in  them,  and  eventually 
through  them  in  the  world,  this  inward  obedience  to 
God.  Its  members,  including  even  its  king,  are,  on 
the  other  hand,  to  suffer  persecution,  since  only 
an  intervention  of  physical  force  could  save  them. 
The  spiritual  means  for  the  establishment  of  the  king- 
dom are,  first,  the  power  of  the  truth  to  make  its  own 
way  owing  to  its  essential  affinity  with  human  nature ; 
and,  secondly,  the  power  of  righteousness,  or  the 
1  Mat.  3:2;  4:17;  10  :  7,  etc. 


12  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

embodied  truth,  to  communicate  itself,  to  spread  from 
man  to  man.  Jesus'  own  kingly  power  is  of  this 
spiritual  kind.  He  rules  within,  controlling  men  by 
his  absolute  truth,  his  righteousness,  and  his  love. 
Evidently,  it  came  to  be  included  in  this  programme 
that  Israel  was  to  be  set  aside.  The  absolute  spiritu- 
ality of  the  kingdom  meant  its  catholicity.  "Accepted, 
not  enforced," — this  is  its  motto.  Force  can  procure 
outward  subjection  and  obedience,  but  only  spiritual 
acceptance  can  procure  inward  obedience.  The  abso- 
lute elimination  of  external  force  is  therefore  demanded 
by  the  very  terms  of  the  problem,  which  render  force 
useless. 


CHAPTER  n 


GOD 


Since  the  object  of  Jesus  is  to  establish  God's  rule 
over  men  by  persuasion,  it  is  evident  that  the  stress  of 
his  teaching  must  be  upon  the  doctrine  of  God.  He 
must  set  God  before  men  in  such  a  way  as  to  draw 
them  to  him.  But  the  real  occasions  of  this  teaching 
are  to  be  found,  not  in  its  object,  but  in  the  facts  of 
Jesus'  own  spiritual  nature  and  experience.  The 
source  of  his  spiritual  life  was  in  his  sense  of  God. 
No  other  fact  stood  out  so  strongly  as  this  in  his 
teeming  consciousness.  And  he  saw  moreover  that 
this  is  the  normal  condition  of  men,  and  that  the  thing 
which  rendered  the  life  of  men  abnormal  and  unsatis- 
factory was  the  absence  of  this  consciousness  of  God, 
which  he  therefore  set  himself  to  produce.  But  he 
also  saw  that  such  ideas  of  God  as  men  had,  needed 
absolute  revision  in  the  light  of  that  knowledge  which 
his  own  perfect  sense  of  God  gave  him. 

At  the  same  time,  Jesus  found  among  the  Jews  ^  a 
comparative  knowledge  of  God,  which  made  them  the 
nation  from  which  his  work  of  establishing  the  king- 
dom must  start.     The  great  contribution  of  Israel  to 


The  doctrine 
of  God  in  the 
teaching  of 
Jesus. 


The  contri- 
bution of  the 
Jews  to  the 
doctrine  of 
God. 


1  Otley,  Aspects  of  the  0.  T. ,  161-205 ;  Schiiltz,  O.  T.  Theology, 
rr,  100-179  ;  Wendt,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  I,  48  sq.;  Kittel, 
History  of  the  Hebreios,  I,  242  sq.,  II,  157  sq.  ;  Montefiore,  Ilib- 
bert  Lectures,  1892,  415  sq.,  539  sq. ;  Smith,  Religion  of  the 
Semites,  28-139 ;  Budde,  Beligion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile ; 
Duhm,  Theologie  der  Fropheten;  Weber,  Judische  Theologie. 

13 


14 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


religious  thought  was  the  unity  and  righteousness  of 
God.  Our  Lord  makes  use  of  the  former  truth,  the 
unity  of  the  Divine  Being,  to  enforce  the  concentra- 
tion of  religious  affection  upon  the  One  God,  after  the 
fashion  of  the  Old  Testament.^  And  he  uses  the  abso- 
luteness of  the  divine  righteousness  to  enforce  righteous- 
ness in  man.^  But  the  noticeable  thing  about  Jesus' 
doctrine  of  God  is  the  absence  of  everything  touching 
the  mode  of  the  Divine  Being,  and  the  concentration 
of  attention  upon  his  ethical  qualities.  There  is  in 
his  teaching  little  or  no  contribution  to  the  philosophy 
of  the  Divine  Being,  its  whole  effect  being  to  increase 
our  religious  knowledge,  and  to  excite  our  religious 
sensibilities. 

The  most  unique  and  instructive  element  in  Jesus' 
presentation  of  God  is  the  contribution  made  to  it  by 
his  own  activity.  What  he  was,  and  did,  is  of  more 
consequence  than  what  he  said.  There  is  contained  in 
that  life  more  proof  that  God  is,  than  in  all  other 
approach  of  God  to  man,  or  of  man  to  God.  Now,  in 
the  investigation  of  this  side  of  the  revelation  through 
Christ,  it  is  the  miracles  that  attract  our  attention  first, 
and  paradoxical  though  it  may  seem,  it  is  the  miracles 
that  afford  us  most  valuable  information.  There  are 
two  facts  about  them  which  are  alike  interesting  and 
apparently  contradictory.  First,  their  frequency  — 
for  they  make  the  bulk  of  the  Gospel  story;  and  sec- 
ondly, our  Lord's  reticence  about  them.^  This  fre- 
quency on  the  one  hand  means  their  importance,  but 
the  reticence  means  that  we  have  mistaken  their 
apologetic  use.  We  say  that  the  power  by  itself  is 
proof  of  Jesus'  divine  mission.  But  this  would  not 
lead  to  reticence.   Evidently  the  miracles  had  for  their 


1  Mk.  12  :  29.    2  Mat.  5  :  48.     »  Mk.  1 :  44,  46 ;  6  :  43  ;  7  :  36  , 
8  :  26 ;  Mat.  9 :  30. 


GOD  15 

object  just  what  appears,  when  we  approach  them  from, 
any  other  side  than  just  their  power.  They  are  works 
of  beneficence,  performed  to  meet  some  need,  or  to 
alleviate  some  ill.  And  they  are  restricted  to  this. 
There  is  in  them  no  show  of  judgment,  of  hostility  to 
enemies,  of  protection  against  persecution,  no  external 
propagation  of  religion.  All  of  these  objects  belong 
to  miracles  wherever  else  you  find  a  miracle  story,  and 
their  absence  is  the  unique  thing  about  Jesus'  miracles. 
It  is  evidently  just  the  effect  of  wonder  produced  by 
their  supernatural  power  which  Jesus  deprecated,  and 
which  led  him  to  enforce  silence  about  them  among  Miracles  had 
the  people.  And  yet,  we  should  be  making  a  mistake  *"  apoio- 
about  the  miracles,  if  we  said  that  they  had  no  apolo- 
getic effect.  No,  Jesus'  desire  being  to  procure  obe- 
dience to  God  among  men,  by  showing  above  all  what 
God  is,  nothing  could  have  been  more  effective  than 
the  miracles.  They  show  us  in  a  picture  what  would 
be  the  effect  of  introducing  God's  presence  and  rule 
among  men,  on  the  side  of  our  external  ills.  We  can- 
not say  exactly  that  they  solve  the  problem  of  these 
evils,  but  they  do  show  the  divine  pity,  and,  therefore, 
that  to  set  up  God's  kingdom  would  mean  the  alle- 
viation of  evils.  It  would  mean  the  unhindered  x>lay 
in  the  world  of  a  Supreme  Power  actively  interested 
in  man's  good,  and  untiring  in  the  pursuit  of  it. 

We  learn,  moreover,  what  the  kingdom  of  God  would  Miracles 
mean  on  the  spiritual  side.  The  reason  that  Jesus,  liagdom. 
who,  after  all,  was  sent  here  principally  for  the  amelio- 
ration of  man's  spiritual  condition,  was  so  shut  up  to 
this  physical  display  of  his  beneficent  power,  was  evi- 
dently the  same  lack  of  faith  which  in  several  cases 
prevented  his  miracles.*  If  he  had  found  even  the 
same  amount  of  faith  in  the  spiritual  realm  as  in  the 

1  Mat.  9  :  28,  29  ;  17  :  16,  19  ;  Mk.  6  :  6. 


16  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

physical,  he  could  have  produced  corresponding  effects. 
For  faith  is  the  undoubted  medium  of  spiritual  gifts, 
■whereas  its  relations  to  physical  miracles  is  yet  await- 
ing a  satisfactory  explanation.  The  teaching  of  the 
miracles  is  therefore  this,  that,  whatever  may  be  the 
outward  appearance,  God's  will  toward  men  is  con- 
sistently, and  without  exception,  beneficent ;  it  is  a  good 
will.  This  is  one.  side  of  the  revelation  of  the  king- 
dom therefore,  and  it  is  a  Gospel,  a  piece  of  good  news, 
that  God  is  about  to  establish  his  kingdom  among 
men.^ 

The  miracles  show  us  the  divine  attitude  toward 
the  physical  evils  that  infest  the  world.  We  have  an 
equally  decisive  sign  of  God's  attitude  toward  the 
spiritual  evils,  the  sins  of  men,  in  Christ's  treatment 
of  men  whom  society  cast  out  as  socially  and  morally 
defiling.  Prominent  among  these  were  the  gatherers 
of  the  Koman  taxes,  the  men  called  publicans  in  our 
Version.  Their  office  was  unpatriotic,  and  opened 
the  way  for  exactions  and  frauds,  of  which  it  is 
evident  that  they  were  no  ways  loath  to  avail  them- 
selves. Yet  one  of  this  despised  class  Jesus  called 
to  be  an  apostle,  another  he  took  pains  to  treat 
with  distinction,  and  he  was  known  as  the  friend  of 
the  whole  class.  With  them  he  associated  in  the 
same  treatment  the  women  on  whom  society  especially 
puts  its  ban.  The  story  of  one  of  these,  and  of  our 
Lord's  infinite  tact  and  gentleness  in  responding  to 
her  penitence  and  shame-stricken  love,  is  one  of  the 
most  beautiful  in  even  his  shining  record.^  It  shows 
us  what  is  God's  heart  toward  a  sinful  world,  that 

1  See  Bruce,  The  Miraculous  Element  in  the  Gospels  ;  Trench, 
Miracles ;  Burton,  Chrisfs  Acted  Parables  ;  Gould,  Interna- 
tional Grit.  Com.  on  Mark,  notes  on  1 :45 ;  Dods,  "Jesus  as 
Healer,"  Biblical  World,  March,  1900. 

a  Lk.  7  :  36-60. 


GOD  17 

it  is  not  his  anger  that  is  stirred  up,  nor  his  justice 
that  is  emphasised,  in  his  contact  with  these  outcasts 
of  society,  but  a  tireless  and  persistent  love  and  pity. 
But  as  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  idea  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  to  have  it  appear  that  God  is  any- 
way tolerant  of  sin,  this  friendliness  of  Christ  toward 
sinners  is  exercised  only  in  the  interest  of  cure,  and 
forgiveness  is  conditioned  on  repentance. 

There  is  another  side,  moreover,  to  this  treatment  of 
sin  by  our  Lord.  The  sin  which  is  acknowledged  and 
confessed  he  treats  with  this  clemency.  The  sin  which 
masquerades  as  righteousness  he  treats  with  the  sever- 
ity that  it  deserves.     His  condemnation  of  it,  more-  Thetheolog- 

over,  he  iustifies  by  a  name  which  unfortunately  our  *^*^  signifi- 
,  ,  ,.        .      ,  ,  ,  ,.  ..       cance  of  the 

translators  have  disguised  by  merely  transliterating  it.   attitude  of 

Sinners  of  this  class  he  calls  hypocrites,  that  is,  play-  ^f|"j  ^cial 
actors,  performers  of  a  part.  And  the  thing  which  he  classes, 
condemns  in  them  is  this  falseness,  the  unreality  of 
their  lives.  His  teaching  is  occupied  largely  with  the 
exposure  of  this  false  righteousness,  and  with  the 
exposition  from  one  side  and  another  of  the  nature 
of  true  righteousness.  His  association  with  tax- 
gatherers  and  harlots,  therefore,  is  something  more 
than  mere  pity,  an  unselfishness  which  goes  where  it 
is  most  needed.  It  is  a  readjustment  of  values,  showing 
that  the  divine  judgments  are  different  in  kind  from 
human  judgments.  Men's  judgments  test  a  man  by 
his  respectability,  or  outward  conformity  to  the  man- 
ners and  morals  of  society.  God's  judgments  have 
regard  always  to  motives,  and  are  lenient  or  severe 
accordingly. 

An  extreme   graciousness,  coupled  with  an  unex-  Modifica- 
pected  severity,  seems  then  to  be  our  Lord's  spirit  in  !io|»  ^^  o"'^ 
his  dealings  with  the  sin  of  men.     There  are  three  con-  to  the  sever- 
siderations,  however,  to  modify  our  judgment  of  this  ^^^  °^  Jesus, 
severity.     In  the  first  place,  the  sin  that  is  judged 
c 


18  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

severely  is  the  lack  of  this  graeiousness  in  dealing 
with  other  men.*  It  was  not  so  much  that  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees  were  scrupulous  about  small  and  unim- 
portant matters,  as  that  they  were  unscrupulous  about 
really  important  matters,  and  especially  about  this 
mercy  ^  which  God  displays  so  bountifully,  but  which 
2.  His  teach-  he  also  exacts  so  rigorously.  Secondly,  the  statement 
eradousneffi  about  the  sun  and  rain,  which  God  is  said  to  send  upon 
good  and  evil  alike.  This  is  given  as  a  reason  why 
men  should  forgive  each  other.  When  we  come  to 
analyse  this  statement,  we  find  in  it  the  restriction 
of  God's  judgments  to  the  sphere  of  cause  and  effect. 
Some  evil  must  result  from  evil  upon  the  evil  man 
himself;  that  is  a  matter  of  course.  But  what  will 
that  result  be  in  a  world  like  this,  which  is  governed 
purely  by  law,  that  is,  by  natural  sequence  ?  Evidently, 
results  will  be  of  the  same  kind  as  the  cause.  Moral 
evil  will  follow  moral  evil,  intellectual  and  physical 
ills  will  result  from  causes  of  the  same  kind,  and  will 
be  restricted  to  these.  Now,  the  beauty  of  Jesus' 
announcement  of  this  principle  is  that  he  makes  it  a 
matter  of  God's  disposition.  It  is  a  matter  of  his  grace, 
that  he  does  not  extend  his  necessary  judgments  against 
sin  by  adding  to  them  pains  and  deprivations  belonging 
to  the  physical  sphere*^  Such  sufferings  as  the  result 
of  sin  could  be  ascribed  only  to  God's  vengeance,  and 
the  core  of  our  Lord's  doctrine  of  God  is  that  he  is 
not  vengeful.  Thirdly,  there  is  the  statement  about 
the  joy  in  heaven  over  one  sinner  that  repents,  and 
not  only  joy,  but  the  endeavour  to  secure  that  joy  which 
ceases  not  until  its  object  is  accomplished.*  The 
upshot  of  the  whole  matter  of  God's  severity  is,  thus, 

1  Mat.  23  :  23,  25,  29-36  ;  Mk.  12  :  40. 

2  Lk.  11  :  42  ;  Mat.  23  :  23.  «  Mat.  5  :  46. 
♦  Lk.  15;  see  especially  vs.  4.     The  expression  "imtil  he 

finds  it"  is  necessary  to  the  completion  of  the  picture,  but 


GOD  19 

that  it  is  confined  within  the  necessary  sphere  of  cause 
and  effect ;  that,  even  there,  the  effect  does  not  outlive 
the  cause ;  and  that  God  does  not  cease  working  over 
cause  itself  until  it  is  quite  removed.  I  do  not  see 
why  this  is  not  a  perfect  theodicy. 

It  is  another  obvious  sign  of  Jesus'  sense  of  God's  God  a 
graciousness  as  the  conspicuous  thing  about  him,  that  ^**'^®'"- 
he  calls  him  Father.^    It  would  seem  more  in  harmony 
with  his  teaching  about  the  kingdom,  that  he  shoidd 
call  God,  King.     And  in  order  to  a  proper  estimate 
of  the  term  "  Father,"  it  is  necessary  to  look  at  it  in 
the  light  of  this  other  fact  of  the  kingdom.     It  means 
the  same  as  when  an  earthly  king  is  called  the  father 
of  his  people.     Usually,  the  title  of  king  implies  a 
certain  indifference  to  his  subjects,  or  even  oppression 
of  them.     It  is  even  now  considered  an  exceptional 
thing,  which  men  regard  with  a  certain  incredulity, 
for  a  ruler  to  declare  that  "public  office  is  a  public 
trust."    And  when  one  is  found,  whose  interest  is  the 
welfare  of  his  people,  who  devotes  himself  to  them,      . 
and  who  makes  sacrifices  for  them,  instead  of  demand-      j 
ing  sacrifices  of  them,  his  care  is  signified  by  a  title      I 
taken  from  another  sphere,  in  which  the  relation  is      / 
more  intimate.     It  is  simply,  then,  another  way  of  say- 
ing that  God  is  a  beneficent  ruler,  whose  people  are 
enshrined  in  his  heart,  when  Jesus  calls  him  Father. 

let  us  thank  God  that  it  is  there.  Our  Lord  does  not  leave 
that  picture  without  this  final  touch  of  splendour. 

1  Horton,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  53-65 ;  Stevens,  The 
Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  65-75 ;  Beyschlag,  Nero  Testament 
neology,  I,  79-99 ;  Wendt,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  I,  184-209  ; 
Bruce,  The  Kingdom  of  God,  109-127  ;  Fairbaim,  Christ  in 
Modern  TJieology,  360-440  ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  iV.  T.,  I, 
92  sq. ;  Mathews,  Social  Teaching  of  Jesus,  62-69 ;  Wright, 
Fatherhood  of  God;  Mead,  Am.  Jour,  of  Theology,  1897, 
677-600  ;  Bradford,  "  God  —  Interpreted  by  Fatherhood,"  Bib- 
lical World,  October,  1898. 


20 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


God  de-  It  is  another  sign  of  God's  graciousness,  that  the 

oTas.^  ^"^^  claim  that  he  makes  upon  us  is  for  our  love.  What 
is  the  thing  that  he  craves  ?  That  tells  the  story  of 
his  nature.  It  has  another  aspect ;  it  tells  us  the  law 
of  the  situation,  what  is  normal  to  the  relation,  so 
that  what  God  demands  will  be  right  in  the  absolute 
sense  of  the  word.  But  if  God  is  a  being  who  is 
swayed  by  what  we  consider  the  emotional  side  of 
being,  in  whom  the  affections  predominate,  that  will 
certainly  be  shown  when  he  comes,  not  simply  to 
make  a  claim  on  us,  but  to  remonstrate,  and  plead,  and 
show  the  eagerness  of  desire.  And  when,  therefore, 
Jesus  makes  this  the  first  command  of  the  Law,  that 
God  is  love,  we  love  God  wholly,  it  means  nothing  else,  it  can 
mean  nothing  else,  than  that  God  himself  is  love,  that 
love  is  the  key  to  his  nature.^ 

This  loving  God  demands  that  service  be  rendered 
first  to  himself,  and  then  to  man;  but  Jesus  sometimes 
apparently  reverses  this  order,  because  he  subordinates 
those  acts  in  which  men  appear  to  serve  God  directly 
to  those  in  which  the  service  is  of  men  directly,  and 
of  God  only  indirectly.  God  desires  mercy  to  men 
rather  than  sacrifice  offered  to  himself.''  He  requires 
honour  of  parents  rather  than  any  gift  to  himself.'  He 
requires  men  to  be  at  peace  with  each  other  before 
they  come  to  the  altar.*  He  regards  judgment,  mercy, 
and  faith  weightier  matters  than  paying  tithes  to  the 
treasury  of  the  temple.*  He  scorns  the  idea  that  the 
Sabbath  law  can  stand  in  the  way  of  an  act  of  mercy, 
and  virtually  transfers  this  law  from  the  first  table  to 
the  second,  saying  that  the  Sabbath  was  made  for 
man.®  The  paradox  of  these  various  statements  is 
easy  to  resolve.     All  of  these  contrasted  acts  are  ser- 

1  Mat.  22  :  37  ;  Lk.  7  :  42.  2  Mat.  9 :  13  ;  12  :  7. 

«  Mk.  7  : 1 1-13.  *  Mat.  5  :  23,  24.  6  Mat.  23 :  23. 

«  Mk.  2  :  27  ;  Mat.  12  :  9-13. 


Service  of 
God  and 
man  identi 
fied. 


GOD  21 

vice  of  God,  if  done  rightly.  Only  the  acts  of  worship 
and  homage  are  like  all  acts  of  that  kind ;  they  belong 
to  the  conventions  and  forms  of  service.  And  in  the 
case  of  God,  it  is  only  in  these  forms  that  he  can 
be  served  directly.  All  the  real  service  of  him  must 
be  rendered  indirectly  through  the  service  of  man. 
And  thus  the  real  service  of  God  and  man  become 
identified. 

But  while  this  demand  of  love  shows  God's  nature  Reverse 
to  be  love,  while  it  is  on  this  side  the  most  gra-  !Ll,® Jl^,*^" 
cious  of  commands,  at  the  same  time,  it  is  the  most  ness. 
rigorous  and  exacting  demand  that  could  by  any 
possibility  be  made  of  man.  It  is  not  only  the  sum 
of  perfections,  the  ideal  side  of  human  nature,  but  it 
is  for  that  reason  the  most  difficult  of  achievement, 
the  one  against  which  human  nature  rebels.  I  do  not 
mean  to  say  that  men  would  not  accommodate  them- 
selves to  a  system  in  which  this  was  the  ruling  senti- 
ment. But  under  a  system  in  which  self-regard,  a 
steady  fight  for  one's  own  interest,  is  the  acknow- 
ledged economic  principle,  love  is  so  manifestly  disad- 
vantageous, and  selfishness  has  such  overgrown  prizes 
for  the  stronger  and  coarser  natures,  that  love  becomes 
the  most  difficult  and  despised  of  all  virtues.  For  in 
such  a  condition  of  things  it  means  self-abnegation. 
The  only  condition  of  obtaining  what  Jesus  calls  the 
world  is  that  a  man  throw  himself  with  all  his  might 
into  the  selfish  conflict  for  its  possession.  And  if,  on 
the  other  hand,  he  prefers  the  luxury  of  righteousness 
and  self-approval,  and  works  for  the  common  weal, 
the  rough  world  pushes  him  aside,  and  he  loses  worldly 
good,  with  all  that  it  means  in  the  way  of  ease,  leisure, 
position,  and  culture.  And  then,  if  it  were  only  the 
man  himself  who  has  .to  suffer !  But  in  any  such  loss 
a  man  drags  down  those  dependent  on  himself  as  well. 
In  other  words,  selfishness  makes  the  social  environ- 


22  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ment,  and  is  expounded  as  the  indispensable  condition 
of  advancement  and  civilisation.  Our  Lord  proposes 
to  substitute  for  it  the  opposite  principle  of  love. 
Those  who  join  hands  with  him  must  count  on  the 
sharp  hostility  of  the  existing  order. 
A  God  of  We  must  add  to  this  reverse  side  of  God's  gracious- 

]u  gmen  .  ^ggg^  ^\^q^^  j^g  jg  q,  God  of  judgment.  This  does  not 
appear  in  his  distribution  of  common  goods,  such  as 
sun  and  rain,  nor  in  the  apportionment  of  this  world's 
goods,  which  is  governed  at  present  by  exactly  that 
other  principle  of  competition  which  disregards  God's 
laws.  These  effects  do  not  belong  in  the  moral  sphere, 
and  so  are  not  included  in  the  results  of  moral  action. 
The  loss  that  the  evil  man  incurs  is  in  himself;  it 
affects  not  what  he  has,  but  what  he  is.  He  loses  his 
soul,  or,  as  Luke  puts  it,  he  suffers  the  loss  of  him- 
self. Sin  is  self-destruction,  and  in  this  sense  the 
Sin  excludes  man  who  sins  sets  the  powers  of  the  universe  at  work 
k-^^V'm  against  himself.^  But  there  is  another  judgment 
equally  severe  to  a  man  who  has  vision.  Sin  shuts  a 
man  out  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  or  in  the  more 
expressive  phrase  for  this  connection,  out  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  That  is,  it  prevents  his  member- 
ship in  the  order  which  obtains  in  the  universe. 
Whatever  meaning  heaven  may  have  aside  from  this, 
it  is  evident  from  our  Lord's  teaching  that  it  is  the 
place  where  this  divine  order  does  obtain.^  The  only 
condition  that  our  Lord  makes  for  entrance  into  it  is 
the  doing  of  God's  will,  and  this  makes  the  character 
of  the  place  as  obvious  as  when  one  speaks  of  an 
artists'  guild,  or  a  manufacturers'  club.  The  essential 
thing  in  each  case  is  this  character  of  the  membership 
and  not  the  luxury  of  the  quarters  in  which  the  mem- 
bers are  domiciled. 

1  Mat.  16  :  24-26 ;  Mk.  8  :  34-37  ;  Lk.  9 :  23-25.         a  Mat.  6  :  10. 


GOL  23 

Here,  then,  are  two  sides  of  judgment,  which  really 
comprise  in  themselves  everything  that  is  disastrous 
to  the  interests  of  men,  the  deterioration  and  destruc- 
tion of  the  man  himself,  and  the  disqualification  for 
the  order  of  things  which  has  been  ordained  by  God 
himself  as  containing  within  itself  the  only  ultimate 
good. 

Yet  it  is  at  just  this  point  that  Jesus  shows  us  the  Ultimate 
ultimate  meaning  of  God's  grace.     It  has  already  qq^'s  gfa«( 
appeared  that  this  grace  is  manifested  immediately  in 
God's  leniency  toward  those  who  transgress  his  law. 
But  its  final  meaning  is  to  be  found,  not  in  this  leniency, 
but  in  God's  persistent  activity  in  the  rescue  and  cure 
of  lost  and  invalid  souls.     Seeking,  saving,  curing, 
finding,  restoring,  are  its  key-words,  and  meantime  the 
sinner  who  recognises  himself  as  such  may  know  that 
God's  treatment  of  him,  whether  lenient  or  severe,  will 
be  such  as  to  secure  this  result.     The  passage.  Mat.  7 :  Wisdom  in 
11,  implies  this  discretion  of  God  in  the  bestowment  of  ^o^nfj^.' 
his  gifts.     He  will  not  give  stones  for  bread;  nor  will 
he  be  lenient  or  lavish  in  his  treatment  of  men,  so  that 
they  will  misjudge  him  and  miss  his  best  gifts.     And 
he  has  not  only  the  will  but  also  the  knowledge  for 
such  gracious  as  well  as  righteous  ordering  of  his  gifts.^ 

1  Lk.  15  ;  Mat.  18  :  11 ;  Mk.  2  :  16,  17. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 

The  king-  SucH,  then,  is  Christ's  teaching  as  to  God,  the  King 

°™  °  '  and  Father,  If  now  we  turn  directly  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  kingdom  of  God,  an  examination  of  Jesus' 
teachings  ^  will  show  that  here,  as  always,  he  dwells  on 
the  idea  rather  than  the  form  of  things.  It  is  clear 
that  it  is  the  idea  of  the  kingdom  that  he  impresses  on 
men's  minds.  But  it  is  also  equally  evident  that  it  is 
the  kingdom  in  its  idea,  and  not  in  any  special  form,  that 
he  seeks  to  establish.  "What  shape  it  shall  assume, 
he  leaves  to  time  and  circumstances  to  decide.  But 
in  defining  the  idea,  he  leaves  nothing  to  chance. 
That  idea  is  the  establishment  of  God's  will  as  the 
ruling  power  in  this  world  by  the  free  act  of  its  inhab- 
Condition  itants.  The  one  condition  of  membership  in  the  king- 
shio'^'"^^'"  ^°™  ^^  *^®  doing  of  that  will.  Nothing  else  can  by 
any  possibility  be  substituted  for  this  obedience.    The 

^  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  I,  188-234  ;  Hor- 
ton,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  25-S7  ;  Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the 
N.  T.,  27-40 ;  Gilbert,  The  Revelation  of  Jesus,  30-166  ;  Bey- 
schlag,  New  Testament  Theology,  I,  41-64 ;  Wendt,  The  Teach- 
ing of  Jesus,  I,  173-405 ;  Mathews,  The  Social  Teaching  of 
Jesus,  40-78;  Bruce,  The  Kingdom  of  God;  Candlish,  The 
Kingdom  of  God  ;  Issel,  Die  Lehre  vom  Reiche  Gottes  im  N.  T.  ; 
SchmoUer,  Die  Lehre  vom  Reiche  Gottes  in  Schriften  des  N,  T. ; 
Liitgert,  Das  Reich  Gottes;  J.  Weiss,  Die  Predigt  Jesu  vom 
Reiche  Gottes;  Paul,  Die  Vorstellungen  vom  Messias  und  vom 
Gottesreich  bei  den  Synoptikern  ;  Krop,  La  Pensee  de  Jesus  sur 
le  Royaume  de  Dieu  d'apres  les  Evangiles  synoptiquea. 

24 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


25 


confession  of  his  lordship,  that  is,  the  saying  of  creeds, 
without  this,  is,  of  course,  nil}  To  follow  Jesus  about, 
and  listen  to  his  words,  —  in  modern  phraseology,  to  go 
to  church,  —  is  vain  without  this.*  It  is  like  building 
on  sand.  The  doing  of  mighty  works  in  Christ's  name, 
that  is,  the  exhibition  of  faith,  without  this  will  end  in 
banishment  from  him.'  The  paying  of  tithes,  that  is, 
liberality  in  gifts,  without  justice,  mercy,  and  faith,  is 
neglect  of  the  weightier  matters  of  the  law.* 

But  the  free  and  imforced  nature  of  the  obedience  is 
equally  plain.  It  appears  first  from  the  predicted 
fate  of  its  adherents.  They  are  to  be  exposed,  not 
incidentally  and  occasionally,  but  continually,  and  in 
the  very  nature  of  things  to  persecution  and  death. 
If  we  treat  Jesus'  own  death,  as  so  many  do,  as  due 
to  a  special  purpose  of  God,  instead  of  to  the  ordinary 
passions  of  men,  it  tells  nothing  of  the  nature  of  the 
kingdom.  But  when  we  accept  Jesus'  own  statement 
about  it,  that  it  is  a  fate  to  be  shared  by  all  who  follow 
him,  it  can  mean  only  one  thing,  that  the  idea  of 
the  kingdom  is  repugnant  to  men,  and  excites  their 
deepest  hostility,  and  that  it  is  not  the  divine  purpose 
to  restrain  them  from  the  exercise  of  this  by  any 
divine  intervention.  Except  for  this,  the  Jewish  idea 
of  the  kingdom  and  Messiah  would  obtain.  If  God 
ruled  the  nations  with  a  rod  of  iron,  it  would  not  be  his 
people  who  would  have  to  suffer,  but  their  enemies. 
There  is  no  constraint,  therefore,  employed  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  kingdom.  The  same  thing  appears 
from  Jesus'  description  of  the  methods  of  the  kingdom. 
These  are  given  most  fully  in  the  parables,^  which 
compare  the  growth  of  the  kingdom  to  the  sowing  and 
growth  of  seed.      The  fundamental  reason  for  this 


Freedom  in 
obedience. 


1.  Member- 
ship in  tiie 
kingdom  is 
foretold  to 
involve  suf- 
fering. 


2.  Methods 
of  the  king- 
dom. 


iMat.  7:21. 
*  Mat.  23  :  23. 


2  Mat.  7  :  24-27. 
6  Mat.  13. 


8  Mat.  7  :  22,  23. 


26  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

growth  is  the  fact,  that  at  bottom  seed  and  soil  —  the 
word  of  God  and  the  mind  of  man,  —  are  adapted  to 
each  other,  so  that,  as  Jesus  says,  the  earth  produces 
fruit  of  itself.^  But  while  this  is  the  fundamental  fact 
on  which  the  sowing  rests,  the  secondary  fact  is  the  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  soil,  some  of  which  obstruct  the  growth. 
Then,  while  God  sows  good  seed  (in  this  parable  good 
men),  the  enemy  sows  tares,  that  is,  bad  men.  But  here 
again,  the  method  of  the  kingdom  appears  in  the  injunc- 
tion not  to  root  up  the  tares,  since  men  are  liable  to  pull 
up  wheat  also,  but  to  let  both  grow  together  till  the 
harvest.  Further,  in  the  nature  of  things,  growth  is 
a  slow  process,  but  not  an  unsure  process.  And  then, 
changing  the  figure,  Jesus  compares  the  growth  to  the 
gradual  leavening  of  a  lump  of  dough.  That  is,  it  is 
a  process  of  infusion,  of  influence.  All  of  this  describes 
the  power  of  the  word  in  the  propagation  of  the  king- 
dom. And  it  accords  with  this,  that  Jesus'  office  is 
prophetic,  and  that  his  relation  to  his  followers  is  that 
of  teacher  to  pupils.  And  when  he  is  about  to  leave 
them,  and  commissions  them  to  carry  forward  his  work, 
the  office  into  which  he  inducts  them  is  the  same  office 
of  teacher.^  The  word  in  these  passages  which  describe 
the  growth  of  the  kingdom,  is  the  word  of  the  king- 
dom, and  the  fruit  which  it  produces  is  obedience  to 
the  law  of  the  kingdom. 

Besides  this  power  of  the  word,  there  is  the  power 
of  good  or  evil  in  men  to  propagate  itself.  Jesus  tells 
his  disciples  that  they  are  the  salt  of  the  earth,  the 
light  of  the  world.^  And  there  are  two  conditions  of 
the  power  which  they  exert.     First,  that  they  preserve 

1  Mk.  4  :  26-28. 

*  Matt.  28 :  19,  20,  and  all  passages  in  which  our  Lord  is 
called  Master,  which  is  a  mistranslation  of  the  Greek  word, 
which  should  be  translated  Teacher.     See  margin  of  K.  V. 

»  Matt.  6  :  13-16. 


THE  Kingdom  of  god  27 

the  quality  itself,  which  is  the  seat  of  power.  If  the  salt 
become  saltless,  with  what  will  you  salt  it  ?  Secondly, 
that  they  not  only  preserve  it,  but  show  it.  They 
are  not  to  hide  their  light  under  a  peck  measure,  but 
put  it  on  the  lampstand.  It  is  easy  to  misunderstand 
this  command,  if  we  suppose  the  acts  themselves  to  be 
the  light  which  they  are  to  diffuse,  an  injunction  which 
would  savour  of  ostentation.  But  the  light  is  the 
inward  light  of  character,  which  they  are  to  let  shine 
forth  in  acts,  without  which  the  light  is  unreal.  But 
after  all,  the  great  proof  of  the  free  and  unconstrained 
nature  of  this  obedience  is  the  inwardness  of  the  law. 
A  law  of  religious  observances  and  ceremonials,  even 
a  law  of  external  ethical  conduct,  admits  of  external 
enforcement.  Man  can  be  forced  to  keep  the  nine  com- 
mandments, but  a  law  of  love  is  evidently  a  matter 
of  motives  and  inward  constraints. 

It  is  important  to  notice  first,  that  Jesus  insists  on  The  law  of 
the  law.^  There  is  no  hint  in  his  teaching,  that  there  ^om^*°^" 
is  any  sense  whatever  in  which  the  law  is  repealed.  On 
the  contrary,  he  says  that  his  purpose  is  to  complete 
the  law.  Some  things  in  the  law  he  abrogates  on  the 
ground  that  they  are  not  parts  of  the  divine  law. 
Thus  he  refuses  to  sanction  the  Mosaic  permission  for 
divorce  ;^  he  does  not  hesitate  to  break  the  Sabbath* — 
at  least  as  far  as  Pharisaic  rules  were  concerned,  and* 
he  is  said  by  the  evangelist  to  abrogate  the  Mosaic 
distinction  between  meats.  But  the  law  itseK  he  leaves 
more  rigorous  and  exacting  than  ever.  He  substitutes 
in  each  case  for  the  special  enactment  of  the  law,  the 
principle,  with  whatever  the  principle  comprehends. 

1  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  I,  130-160 ; 
Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  17-26 ;  Bruce,  The  King- 
dom of  God,  63-84  ;  Wendt,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  II,  1-47  ; 
Mackintosh,  Christ  and  the  Jewish  Laio. 

a  Matt.  19  :  8.  »  Mk.  2  :  23  sq.  *  Mk.  7  :  19. 


28 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  law 
made  in- 
ward. 


Teaching  as 
to  wealth. 


He  therefore  enlarges  the  range  of  law  almost  indefi- 
nitely. Then  he  carries  it  within,  and  makes  it  a  matter 
of  sentiments,  affections,  of  pity,  tolerance,  humility, 
gentleness,  purity,  but  especially  of  love.  He  dwells 
on  two  things  in  this  connection :  first,  the  necessity  of 
the  reqiiired  affection  as  the  motive  of  the  action ;  and 
secondly,  the  necessity  of  action  expressing  the  affec- 
tion. And  he  thereby  insists  really  on  both  sides  of 
action,  and  makes  evasion  impossible.  Jesus  insists 
on  a  rare  and  fine  spirit  in  men.  They  are  not  to  look 
at  a  woman  impurely ;  ^  they  are  to  go  so  far  in  the 
direction  of  truthfulness  as  to  regard  even  an  oath  as 
an  invention  of  the  evil  one,  making  something  more 
sacred  than  a  man's  word.''  They  are  to  love  their 
enemies.  Moreover,  they  must  avoid  ostentation, 
doing  not  even  right  things  to  be  seen  by  men,  lest 
pride  should  vitiate  the  good  quality  of  the  act.' 

But  the  most  radical  specification  which  Jesus 
makes  in  the  matter  of  conduct  is  what  he  says  about 
the  pursuit  of  wealth.*  It  is  contrasted  with  laying  up 
treasure  in  heaven,  that  is,  the  inward  wealth  which 
is  the  only  treasure  there.  He  readjusts  the  whole 
scale  of  values,  insisting  that  what  a  man  is,  is  of  con- 
sequence, and  not  what  he  has.  And  he  says  that 
these  real  values  are  to  be  pursued  with  singleness  of 
heart.  Men  cannot  combine  the  service  of  wealth  and 
the  service  of  God.  So  far  is  this  true,  that  Jesus 
calls  wealth  unrighteous.    This  has  a  startling  appear- 

1  Matt.  5  :  28.  2  Matt.  6  :  34  sq. 

8  Matt.  6  :  17,  18  ;  Mk.  7  :  14-19  ;  Matt.  5  :  21-32  ;  6 :  1-23  ; 
Mk.  12  :  .30,  31 ;  Matt.  5  :  13-16,  28,  33-37,  43-48. 

*  Rogge,  Der  irdische  Besitz  im  N.  T.,  1-48 ;  Mathews,  The 
Social  Teaching  of  Jesus,  132-157  ;  Horton,  The  Command- 
ments of  Jesus,  ch.  15;  Nathusius,  Die  Mitarheit  der  Kirche  an 
der  Losung  der  Socialen  Frage  ;  Root,  The  Profit  of  the  Many : 
or  the  Biblical  Doctrine  and  the  Ethics  of  Wealth;  Waffle, 
Christianity  and  Property:  an  Interpretation. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


29 


ance ;  in  reality  it  so  exactly  accords  with  his  teaching 
about  the  law  of  love,  that  it  would  eventually  be 
received  as  a  necessary  inference  from  the  principle, 
without  the  specific  statement.  Not  that  these  goods 
which  constitute  material  wealth  are  themselves  evil, 
but  that  the  qualities  involved  in  the  appropriation  of 
these  by  the  individual  are  obviously  selfish.^ 

But  no  specification  can  possibly  equal  in  difficulty 
and  ideality  the  principle  which  is  enunciated  by  Jesus 
as  the  embodiment  of  the  law.  Love  is  in  certain 
limitations  as  easy  as  it  is  beautiful.  Certain  rela- 
tions, propinquities,  affinities,  awaken  it,  especially 
those  of  the  family  and  of  sex.  But  outside  of  these, 
the  selfish  interest  so  predominates  as  to  make  love 
nearly  impossible.  The  love  of  power  creates  antago- 
nisms, business  is  a  strife  of  individual  interests. 
Nay,  the  very  afiinities  which  create  love  in  limited 
circles  create  repulsions  and  antagonisms  outside, 
Anglo-Saxon  ties  mean  Latin  aversions.  How  strong 
this  tendency  of  men  to  fly  apart  is,  is  nowhere  so 
evident  as  in  the  Church,  where  the  law  of  schism  has 
been  substituted  for  the  law  of  love,  and  aroused  the 
bitterest  strifes.  Moreover,  the  degree  of  love  required 
is  the  most  exacting  part  of  the  law.  To  love  your 
neighbour  when  it  does  not  conflict  with  your  own  inter- 
est, to  love  him  except  when  you  can  make  something 
out  of  him,  is  easy.  But  to  love  him  as  yourself 
means  the  elevation  of  love  into  a  place  where  it 
changes  all  things.  It  is  not  only  the  individual,  but 
society,  that  needs  to  be  born  again  if  one  is  to  comply 
with  this  law.^ 

There  is  this  to  be  said,  however,  about  Jesus'  atti- 
tude to  the  law,  that  in  spite  of  the  exacting  nature 
of  its  demands,  the  effect  produced  is  that  of  emanci- 

1  Matt.  6  :  24  ;  Lk.  16  : 9-13  ;  Mk.  10  :  23-26. 

2  Matt.  6  :  43-46  ;  22  :  37-39. 


The  diffi- 
culties in 
the  way  of 
a  law  of 
love. 


Emancipa- 
tion the 
result  of  this 
teaching. 


30  l^EW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

pation.  This  note  of  freedom  takes  on  different  forms 
in  the  different  books  of  the  New  Testament,  but  in 
one  form  or  another,  it  is  general,  if  not  miiversal. 
In  Paul,  it  is  absolute  freedom  from  the  law.  In 
James  the  law  itself  becomes  a  law  of  freedom.  In 
Peter  it  is  freedom  from  human  law,  owing  to  subjec- 
tion to  the  divine,  the  higher  law.  In  John  it  is  free- 
dom from  sin.  But  the  general  fact  is  noticeable  and 
undeniable,  that  the  effect  on  the  man  who  followed 
Jesus  was  not  that  of  rigour,  but  of  freedom.  This 
was  due  to  the  fact  that  Jesus  imposed  nothing  on  men 
that  was  not  demanded  by  the  absolute  law  of  right- 
eousness, which  is  recognised  by  men  as  belonging  to 
the  nature  of  things.  On  the  other  hand,  it  freed 
them  from  the  arbitrary  enactments  of  the  Jewish 
law.  The  party  of  the  law  among  the  Jews  was  in 
constant  conflict  with  Jesus  because  of  this  careless- 
ness of  ceremonial  enactment  among  his  disciples.  It 
was  not  his  enforcement  of  a  high  standard  of  right- 
eousness that  was  the  primary  cause  of  his  rejection 
at  the  hands  of  ecclesiastics  who  sought  to  substitute 
ceremonial  strictness  for  ethical  uprightness;  it  was 
his  influence  in  emancipating  men  from  the  yoke  of  an 
oppressive  ceremonial.  This  is  one  of  the  meanings 
of  his  easy  yoke.  In  the  meekness  of  his  spirit,  he 
imposed  on  men  no  self-willed  commands ;  he  did  not 
obtrude  himself  and  his  will  on  them,  but  sought  only 
to  enforce  the  commands  of  a  righteousness  having  its 
seat  in  God,  and  which  God  had  impressed  on  the  very 
The  freedom  nature  of  men.  The  freedom  of  the  kingdom  there- 
dom.^  ^^°^'  fore  springs  from  the  reasoned  and  principled  nature 
of  its  law.  In  every  department  of  knowledge  men 
rest  with  confidence  in  the  ultimate  prevalence  of  the 
truth,  because  man  is  built  that  way.  He  believes  that 
two  and  three  are  five,  that  the  earth  is  round,  that  it 
took  ages,  instead  of  days,  to  create  it,  that  truth  and 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD  31 

purity  and  justice  are  obligatory,  because  he  is  built 
that  way.  And  when  truth  displaces  error  in  any 
department  of  knowledge,  man  feels  a  corresponding 
emancipation  of  spirit.  Jesus  is  the  great  liberator 
of  the  human  spirit;  it  is  freedom,  and  not  fetters, 
that  he  puts  on  men  when  he  enforces  the  absolute  law. 

The  profound  graciousness  of  the  law  is  another  Thegra- 
source  of  this  sense  of  freedom.     A  law  having  love  t^eT^^a  °' 
as  its  root,  and  flowering  out  into  gentleness,  mercy,  source  of 
purity  of  heart,  peacemaking,  forgiveness,  though  it  "®®"°'"- 
may  be  difficult  of  attainment,    makes  an    instant 
impression  of  its  beauty,  and  attracts  in  the  very 
statement  of  it.     If  a  man  does  not  obey  such  a  law, 
he  feels  that  he  is  in  bondage  to  an  alien  power,  and 
that  to  come  under  the  spell  of  such  a  law  would  be 
emancipating  in  its  effects. 

Finally,  the  sense  of  emancipation  comes  from  the  Obligation  a 
source  of  obligation.  Why  must  I  obey  ?  Because  l^ancipa- 
it  is  right,  and  to  be  constrained  by  this  is  no  bondage,  ^^^n. 
But  why  is  it  right  ?  It  is  the  answer  to  this  question 
which  lands  us  at  last  in  a  sure  place.  The  source  of 
law  and  of  obligation  is  in  the  nature  of  God.  The 
content  of  the  law  corresponds  exactly  to  what  is 
revealed  to  us  as  the  central  thing  in  God.  The  com- 
mand is  love,  and  God  is  love.  Here,  then,  there  is 
difficulty  certainly,  but  no  bondage.  Jesus  makes  his 
appeal  first  to  what  he  finds  in  men,  and  so  his  teach- 
ing convinces  in  the  mere  statement  of  it ;  he  speaks 
with  authority.  And  secondly,  he  appeals  to  what  he 
finds  in  God.  He  produces  his  effect  by  the  sense  of 
God  which  he  creates.  He  brings  God  and  man 
together.^ 

iMk.  2:18-3:6;  7:1-23;  10:17,  18,  42-45;  11:25;  12: 
28-34,  43,  44  ;  Matt.  5  :  2-12,  45-48  ;  also  the  passages  in  chs. 
6  and  7,  in  which  the  heavenly  Father  is  spoken  of ;  11  : 
25-27. 


32 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


In  connection  with  this  statement  that  Jesus  eman- 
cipates men  through  teaching  a  spiritual  instead  of  a 
positive  law,  it  should  be  said  that  he  belongs  in  the 
prophetic  succession.  There  is  the  clearest  line  of 
demarcation  between  priest  and  prophet  in  the  Old 
Testament ;  and  their  two  systems,  instead  of  being  in 
harmony  as  coordinate  parts  of  the  same  teaching,  are 
really  antagonistic  to  each  other.  The  various  pas- 
sages in  which  the  sacrificial  system  is  deprecated 
might  be  taken  as  meaning  simply  that  the  moral  law 
/is  superior,  and  that  the  ritual  system  is  nil  without 
/obedience  to  that.  But  there  is  one  passage  in  which 
even  that  possible  interpretation  is  excluded ;  the  two 
are  placed  in  absolute  antagonism,  and  the  one  excludes 
the  other.  Jeremiah  ^  says  expressly,  that  in  the  day 
when  God  brought  the  Israelites  out  of  Egypt,  he  gave 
them  no  command  concerning  burnt  offerings  or  sacri- 
fices ;  but  only  this  one  command,  that  they  harken  unto 
his  voice,  and  walk  in  all  the  way  that  he  commands 
them.  That  is,  a  right  walk  is  to  be  substituted  for 
the  sacrifices  by  which  men  seek  to  rid  themselves  of 
the  consequences  of  an  evil  walk.  Isaiah''  adds  to  the 
sacrifices  the  observance  of  new  moons  and  sabbaths, 
as  things  which  God  abhors.  Jesus  takes  his  place 
by  the  side  of  these  prophets,  not  only  afiirming  the 
superiority  of  the  moral  law,  but  speaking  of  the  ritual 
law  as  a  command  of  men,  which  it  is  sin  to  put 
in  the  place  of  the  divine  command.^  This  is  a  fact 
of  the  utmost  importance,  as  it  has  been  supposed  that 
the  sacrificial  idea,  the  altar  system,  was  a  legitimate 
element  of  the  Old  Testament  religion,  and  as  such 
was  to  be  incorporated  in  some  way  in  the  Christian 
thought.  Whereas  the  fact  is,  that  it  was  one  of 
two  antagonistic    ideas,  in  constant,   open    conflict, 

1  7  :  22,  23.  M  :  11-17. 

«  Mk.  7  :  3-33  ;  Matt.  9  :  13  ;  12  : 7. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD 


33 


among  the  Jews,  as  in  fact  among  all  religions,  and 

that  it  was  the  one  of  the  two  which  was  deprecated 

by  the  spiritual  leaders.     It  was  in  the  line  of  these 

spiritual  men,  and  of  this  antagonism,  that  Jesus  stood. 

A  study  of  the  institution  of  the  sacrament  will  show  The 

that  there  is  none  of  the  priestly  idea  of  sacrifice  not^|crifi- 

contained  in  that.     All  that  it  teaches  is  that  Jesus'  ciai  in  the 

death  is  an  example  of  self-sacrifice  for  the  good  of  ^^^^q]^ 

others,  not  in  any  way  a  satisfaction  to  God  for  the 

sins  of  men.    Possibly  if  Jesus  taught  this  elsewhere, 

his  words  in  the  institution  of  the  sacrament  might  be 

construed  in  accordance  with  that  teaching.     But  as 

Jesus  elsewhere  makes  his  death  simply  an  example 

of  self-sacrifice,  what  he  says   in  the  institution  of 

the  sacrament  is  to  be  construed  in  the  same  way. 


CHAPTER  IV 

JESUS'  ESTIMATE  OF  HIMSELF 

The  coining  of  the  kingdom  means  the  appearance 
of  the  Messianic  king.  In  order  to  understand  the 
meaning  of  this,  we  have  to  consider  it  in  its  relation 
to  the  term  "  Kingdom  of  God."  The  ultimate  fact  is, 
that  God  is  king.  Jesus'  position  is,  therefore,  that 
of  vice-gerent.  The  authority  that  he  represents,  that 
he  wields,  is  divine.  He  has  authority  to  forgive  sins, 
to  regulate  the  Sabbath  law,  to  impose  his  yoke  on 
men,  to  judge  men ;  he  is  to  come  again  at  the  right 
hand  of  power,  and  in  the  clouds  of  heaven.  All  of 
these  acts  are  by  virtue  of  his  kingly  power,  but  the 
kingdom  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  or  of  God,^  and  all 
his  appeal  to  men  is  in  the  name  of  God,  or  of  the 
kingdom  which  enshrines  his  will.  To  possess  the 
kingdom,  to  see  God,  to  be  sons  of  God,  to  glorify 
God,  to  be  perfect  as  he  is  perfect,  to  be  recompensed 
by  him,  to  have  his  forgiveness,  to  receive  his  care, 
to  seek  his  righteousness,  to  be  confessed  by  Jesus 
before  his  Father  in  heaven;   these  are  the  appeals 

1  Dalman,  Die  Worte  Jesu,  I,  75-79,  has  made  this  identifi- 
cation of  the  two  terms  practically  certain  by  an  appeal  to  the 
rabbinical  usage  of  the  term  malkuth  shamayim  (Aram,  malku- 
tha'  dhishmaya')  kingdom  of  heaven,  as  a  synonym  of  the  king- 
dom of  God.  For  the  belief  that  Matthew  substitutes  rwv 
oiipavuv  for  toO  Oeov,  see  J.  Weiss,  Der  Predigt  Jesu  vom  Reiche 
Gottes,  9 ;  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  I,  191  sq. 
See  further  Krop,  La  Pensee  de  Jesus  sur  le  Boyaume  de  Dieu. 

34 


JESUS'  ESTIMATE  OF  HIMSELF  35 

that  Jesus  makes  to  men,  and  they  mean  that  it  is  in 
reality  the  kingdom  of  God  that  he  seeks  to  establish, 
the  thought  and  love  of  God  that  he  would  make 
supreme  among  them.^ 

But  a  prime  consideration  in  this  matter  is  what  His  power  as 
Jesus  says  about  the  power  wielded  by  him  in  the  ^^^s^*^- 
exercise   of    his    Messianic    office.      We   have    seen 
already  that  owing  to  the  circumstances  of  his  earthly 
life,  his  chief  outward  activity,  the  thing  to  which  he 
was  confined  in  his  great  work  of  caring  for  the  ills 
of  the  world,  was  his  miracles.     It  is  a  question  of 
first-rate  importance,  therefore,  by  what  power  he  per- 
forms these.    If  it  is  a  power  back  of  him,  that  means 
his  vice-gerency,  and  not  his  individual  power.**    Now, 
in  Matt.  12:28,  Jesus  says  that  it  is  by  the  Spirit 
of  God  that  he  casts  out  demons,^  and  that,  therefore, 
to  say  that  he  casts  them  out  by  Beelzebub  is  to  bias-  The 
pheme  not  himself   but  the  Spirit  of  God.     In  the  flf^l 
passage    from    Isaiah    which    immediately  precedes  worked 
this,*  God  declares  that  he  will  put  his  Spirit  upon  power.  ^ 
the  servant  of  Jahweh,  who  is  one  of  the  Old  Testament 
Messianic  types.*     In  all  of  the  Synoptics,  Jesus  is 
said  to  have  entered  upon  his  career  as  Messiah  in  the 
power  of  the  Spirit.^    When  it  speaks  of  him,  there- 
fore, as  Lord  of  the  Sabbath,  and  having  power  on 
earth  to  forgive  sins,  the  authority  is  derived  from  the 
same  divine  source.     And  in  what  he  says  about  his 
exercise  of  power  after  his  ascension,  he  ascribes  it  to 
the  same  source.    He  is  to  sit,  not  in  the  seat  of  power 

1  Mk.  2  :  28  ;  Matt.  9:6-8;  11 :  29,  30  ;  25 :  31-46  ;  24  :  30  ; 
16:27;  6:3,  8,  9,  16,  48;  6:1,  4,  6,  14,  15,  18,  25-33;  10: 
22,  23. 

2  Compare  the  words  of  Peter,  Acts  2  :  22. 
8  Lk.  11  :  20,  by  the  finger  of  God. 

4  Matt.  12  :  18-21  ;  Is.  42  :  1-4. 

6  Compare,  also,  the  words  of  Peter,  Acts  10  :  38. 

*  Lk.  4  :  14,  18  is  most  explicit  in  this  statement. 


36  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

itself,  but  at  the  right  hand  of  the  power,  and  when 
he  comes  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  it  is  in  the  glory 
of  the  Father.^  In  Mat.  7 :  21,  Jesus  defines  very 
well  his  relation  to  the  Father.  It  is  not  the  man  who 
calls  him  Lord  who  will  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
but  he  who  does  the  will  of  his  Father  who  is  in 
heaven.  That  is,  the  object  of  his  own  lordship  is  to 
secure  obedience  to  the  will  of  God. 
The  self-  The  titles  by  which  Jesus  designates  himself  are  Son 

ofjfsus:'""'  of  Man^  and  Son  of  God.  Both  of  them  are  Messianic 
1.  The  Son  titles.  The  one  by  which  he  most  frequently  designates 
of  Man.  himself.  Son  of  Man,^  is  used  in  the  original  to  denote 
the  vision  of  a  man  who  appeared  to  the  prophet,  repre- 
senting the  kingdom  of  the  saints  as  distinguished 
from  the  beasts  which  represent  the  kingdom  of  the 
world,  which  oppresses  them.  This  came  to  be  regarded 
as  a  Messianic  passage,  and  consequently  Son  of  Man 
as  a  Messianic  title.*  It  seems  to  have  been  chosen 
by  Jesus  as  a  name  which  partly  discovered  and  partly 

1  Matt.  26  :  64  ;  Lk.  22 :  69. 

2  Mathews,  History  of  the  N.  T.  Times  in  Palestine^  173  sq.  ; 
Horton,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  39-51  ;  Holtzmann,  Neutesta- 
mentliche  Theologie,  I,  246-264  ;  Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the 
N.  r.,  41-53  ;  Gilbert,  The  Bevelation  of  Jesus,  18^189  ;  Bey- 
schlag,  New  Testament  Theology,  I,  60  sq. ;  Weiss,  Theology 
of  the  N.  T.,  I,  73-78;  Nosgen,  Christus  der  Menschen-  und 
Qottessohn;  Bruce,  The  Kingdom  of  God,  ch.  7  ;  Weiidt, 
The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  II,  139  S^. ;  Baldensperger,  Das 
Selbstbewusstsein  Jesu,  ch.  7 ;  Grau,  Das  Sclbstbewusstsein 
Jesu,  ch.  6 ;  Stalker,  The  Christology  of  Jesus,  45-83 ;  Appel, 
Die  Selbstbezeichnung  Jesu:  Der  Menschensohn ;  Boehmer, 
Belch  Gottes  und  Menschensohn  im  Buch  Daniel ;  Sieber,  essay 
in  Schnedermann'' s  Jesu  Verkundigung  und  Lehre  vom  Beich 
Gottes;  Krop,  Appendix  in  La  Pensee  de  Jesus  stcr  le  Royaume 
de  Dieu  ;  Sanday,  Art.  "  Jesus  Christ "  in  Hastings'  Diet.  Bib. 

«  Dan.  7  :  13. 

*  Compare  Enoch  46 :  1-4  ;  48  : 2  ;  62 :  5,  7,  9,  14  ;  63  :  11 ; 
69  :  20,  27  ;  70  : 1. 


JESUS'  ESTIMATE  OF  HIMSELF  37 

veiled  his  Messianic  claim,  until  the  time  should  come 
at  the  close  of  his  mission  for  the  full  disclosure  of  it. 
But  to  one  who  is  accustomed  to  our  Lord's  habit  of 
discourse  and  knows  with  what  certainty  his  mind 
turns  to  the  deeper  meanings  of  common  sayings,  it  is 
almost  impossible  to  rest  satisfied  with  this  merely 
politic  use  of  a  term  really  conveying  so  much.  Son  Why  the 
of  Man  is  really  only  a  more  distinct  affirmation  of  ^J^ 
manhood.  That  is  the  meaning  of  the  passage  in 
Daniel,  and  in  the  prophecy  of  Ezekiel.^  And  while 
I  do  not  think  that  Jesus  would  have  accepted  for 
himself  any  title  that  did  not  carry  to  his  hearers  an 
intimation  at  least  of  his  Messianic  claim,  I  still  think 
that  there  is  some  reason  beyond  mere  policy  in  the 
persistency  with  which  he  clings  to  this  title.  One 
thing  is  certain,  those  who  love  and  understand  him 
best,  who  speak  with  most  authority  and  conviction  of 
him,  would  find  it  hard  to  find  another  name  which 
would  tell  them  so  much  of  his  claim  on  our  admira- 
tion and  love. 

If  I  read  rightly  the  inward  consciousness  of  Jesus 
which  disclosed  so  clearly  to  him  his  kingship,  it 
was  through  the  idea  of  manhood  that  he  arrived  at  Manhood 

thp  busis  ox 

the  idea  of  kingship,  and  it  was  by  the  same  road  that  kingship, 
he  knew  man  must  come  to  the  same  glory.  As  he 
grew  to  manhood,  he  must  have  discovered  in  himself 
those  qualities  and  gifts,  which,  while  they  made  his 
life  a  sad  and  splendid  isolation,  yet  peopled  it  with 
the  sorrows  and  sins,  and  on  the  other  hand  with  the 
ideals  and  possibilities  of  the  race,  and  which  made 
him  thus  the  bearer  of  those  burdens,  and  the  splendid 

1  Ezek.  2  : 1,  3,  8  ;  3:1,4,  etc.  See  in  particular  Lietzmann, 
Der  Menschensohn ;  Wellhausen,  Israelitische  und  jMische 
Geschichte,  312  n.  ;  Schmidt,  in  Jour.  Soc.  Bib.  Lit.  and  Ex. 
XV.  3G-53.  As  against  these  authorities  see  Dalmau,  Die  Worte 
Jesu,  I,  ch.  9. 


38  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

example  and  progenitor  of  these  ideals.  In  other 
words,  he  discovered  in  himself  what  made  him  king 
of  men,  and  what  would  lead  ultimately  to  the  rec- 
ognition of  this,  and  so  by  a  straight  road  to  the 
attainment  of  humanity's  goal.  It  was  not  external 
credentials,  it  was  not  miracles,  it  was  not  any  audible 
word  of  God,  that  led  to  his  claim,  but  only  what  he 
saw  enfolded  in  his  manhood.  And  the  rule  which 
he  has  actually  exercised  has  been  the  sway  of  this 
same  perfect  manhood.  When  Peter  made  his  confes- 
sion, it  did  not  come  from  his  belief  in  anything  that 
he  had  been  taught,  but  from  the  impression  that  this 
man,  this  man  among  men,  had  made  on  him.  Now 
this  is  the  ideal  of  kingship,  of  which  others  are  poor 
travesties.  There  is  hereditary  kingship,  there  is 
elective  rule,  but  both  are  imperfect  attempts  to  dis- 
cover the  man  fit  to  rule.  And  when  the  true  king 
of  men  came,  he  depended  on  the  depth  and  truth 
and  worth  of  his  humanity  to  create  for  him  power 
over  man. 

And  yet  this  is  true  only  in  the  light  of  the  supple- 
mentary title,  Son  of  God.^  This  again  is  a  Messianic 
title.'  The  king  or  the  prophet  is  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Son  of  God.^  One,  because  he  represents  God  in 
his  rule  over  the  people.     The  other,  because  he  repre- 

1  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  I,  265-277 ; 
Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the  N.  T,  54-64;  Gilbert,  The 
Bevelation  of  Jesus,  179-185 ;  Beyschlag,  New  Testament  The- 
ology, I,  67  sq.;  Stalker,  The  Christology  of  Jesus,  87-123; 
Weiss,  The  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  I,  78-82  ;  Bovon,  Theologie 
du  Nouveau  Testament,  4A2sq,;  Nosgen,  Christus  der  Menschen- 
und  Gottessohn ;  Grau,  Das  Selhstbewusstsein  Jesu,  ch.  8 ; 
Dalmaa,  Die  Worte  Jesu,  I,  ch.  1  ;  Gore,  Bampton  Lectures, 
1891 ;  Wendt,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  II,  124  sq. ;  Saiiday, 
Art.  "  Jesus  Christ "  in  Hastings'  Diet. 

a  Enoch  105 :  2  ;  4  Esdras  7  :  28,  29  ;  13  :  32,  37,  52  ;  14  : 9. 

«  2  Sam.  7  :  14  ;  Pa.  2  :  7. 


JESUS'  ESTIMATE  OF  HIMSELF  39 

sents  God  in  the  more  inward  act  of  speech  and  reve- 
lation. But  the  name  in  its  best  meaning  becomes  a 
term  of  endearment,  as  among  men.  It  designates  one 
close  to  God.  This  progress  of  ideas  we  recognise  in 
the  Messianic  use  of  the  term.  The  Messiah  repre- 
sents God  in  his  office,  his  rule  being  a  vice-gerency, 
and  not  an  independent  sovereignty.  But  he  repre- 
sents him  more  intimately  in  his  prophetic  office,  the 
truth  that  he  reveals  being  a  reflection  of  God.  And 
finally,  he  represents  God  most  fully  in  those  gifts 
which  betray  intimate  communion  with  God.  In  fact, 
all  the  way  through,  the  secret  of  our  Lord's  life  is 
his  communion  with  God.  But  just  here  also  is  the  Human 
perfection  of  his  manhood.  If  man  grew  simply  by  ^g^ygj 
drawing  on  the  resources  of  his  limited  being,  the  growth  from  God. 
would  be  correspondingly  limited.  But  man  lives  on 
God,  and  there  is  no  limit  to  God.  To  be  the  Son  of 
Man,  therefore,  does  not  mean  anything  ideal,  unless 
it  involve  the  other  term,  "Son  of  God."  Again, 
therefore,  to  go  back  to  the  consciousness  by  which 
Jesus  grew  into  a  sense  of  his  kingship,  this  must 
have  seemed  to  him  the  element  in  himself  which  gave 
him  ascendency  over  man.  It  was  on  the  one  hand 
the  great  lack  that  he  observed  in  men ;  they  had  no 
sense  of  God ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  the  conspicuous 
thing  about  himself,  that  which  gave  colour,  solidity, 
meaning,  depth,  to  his  life,  was  his  open  vision  of  God, 
in  which  he  lived  and  moved.  This  gave  him  author- 
ity, clothed  him  with  power,  because  he  became  by 
the  means  a  real  representative  of  God,  not  merely 
an  official  bearer  of  his  authority. 

Son  of  God  and  Son  of  Man  are  thus  both  of  them 
Messianic  titles,  but  both  are  evidently  in  our  Lord's 
use  of  them  made  to  express  the  facts  of  his  self-con- 
sciousness, on  which  his  Messianic  claim  is  based. 


CHAPTER  V 


JESUS'  CONCEPTION  OF  MAN 


The  view  of 
man  in- 
volved in 
the  preach- 
ing of  the 
kingdom. 


This  is  apparent,  first,  from  the  fact  that  he  came 
to  establish  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  that  he  calls  on 
men  to  repent.^  That  is,  their  normal  position  is  that 
of  beings  who  realise  God,  and  become  subjects  of  his 
.universal  law.  But  after  centuries  of  man's  existence 
on  the  earth,  the  kingdom  has  yet  to  be  established, 
and  for  its  purposes  man  has  to  change  his  mental 
attitude  and  outlook.  Jesus'  profoundly  gracious 
ofi&ce,  for  which  he  was  inspired  by  God,  recognised 
man  as  poor,  captive,  and  blind,  but  capable  of  release." 
His  mission  is  to  men  as  sinners,  and  his  office  is  that 
of  the  physician.'  He  realises,  moreover,  not  only  that 
man  needs  a  radical  change  before  the  kingdom  can 
be  established,  but  that  the  preaching  of  the  kingdom 
will  arouse  the  deepest  antagonism,  so  that  anyone 
who  follows  him  will  be  subject  to  that  hostility. 
And  yet  he  expects  that  the  kingdom  will  come,  and 
that  God's  will  will  be  done  here  as  in  heaven.  It  is 
important  to  remember  in  this  connection  that  Jesus 
treats  the  virtues  of  the  kingdom  as  natural  virtues 
incident  to  the  human  condition,  and  not  as  the 
demands  made  of  a  superior  class  separated  from  their 
fellows.     The  Sermon  on  the  Mouiit,  we  infer,*  was 

1  Matt.  4:17.  2  Lk.  4  :  18-21.  »  Lk.  5  :  31,  32. 

*  Matt.  7  :  28.  The  statement  in  the  text  is  subject  to  pos- 
sible criticism  from  the  fact  that  after  Jesus  went  into  the 
mountain  "  his  disciples  came  unto  him  "  (Matt.  5:1).    In  the 

40 


JESVs'   CONCEPTION  OF  MAN  41 

addressed  to  the  multitudes,  and  not  to  the  disciples 
alone.  And  while  there  is  every  reason  to  believe 
that  no  such  body  of  teaching  was  ever  spoken  by 
Jesus  at  any  one  time,  this  note  is  to  be  taken  as  a 
true  condition  of  this  teaching,  whenever  spoken. 
There  is  an  esoteric  teaching  addressed  to  the  dis-  Duties  of 
ciples  alone  in  regard  to  the  fortunes  of  the  kingdom,  ^ytjeg  ^j 
and  their  own  prospects  in  connection  with  it,  but  this  membera 
does  not  include  any  of  the  teaching  in  regard  to  the  kiugdom. 
law  of  the  kingdom,  which  is  a  common  matter.  It  is 
men,  and  not  merely  disciples,  who  are  to  love  each 
other  as  themselves.  Antagonisms  among  men,  or 
even  to  repay  antagonism  with  antagonism,  is  against 
the  law  of  the  kingdom,  whereas  to  meet  it  with  love 
makes  men  sons  of  God.  Prayer  becomes  also  a  human 
duty,  only  it  must  be  real,  and  especially  when  men  pray 
to  be  forgiven,  they  must  not  forget  to  forgive.  They 
are  dwellers  in  this  world,  but  since  it  is  now  an  alien 
world,  their  affections  are  to  be  concentrated  on  the 
spiritual  order  toward  which  the  world  tends.  Com- 
bine this  with  the  prayer  taught  by  our  Lord,  that 
God's  kingdom  may  come,  and  his  will  be  done  here 
on  earth  as  in  heaven,  and  what  does  it  mean,  except 
that  there  is  an  ideal  order  not  yet  realised,  but  sure 
to  come,  because  it  is  latent  in  humanity  ?  And  the 
thing  that  he  enjoins  on  men  is,  therefore,  faith,  that  is, 
the  spiritual  sense  which  puts  men  in  connection  with 
this  spiritual  order,  and  clothes  them  with  its  powers.* 

And  yet  he  is  far  from  enjoining  on  men  any  estrange- 
light  of  this  statement  and  of  the  composite  character  of  the 
discourse,  it  may  not  be  possible  to  regard  Matt.  7  :  28  as  more 
than  a  general  statement  derived  from  such  a  passage  as  Mk. 
1  :  22.  It  is,  indeed,  at  this  point  that  the  teaching  material  in 
Matthew  is  added  to  the  Mark  source.  But  the  view  in  the 
text  is,  on  the  whole,  preferable. 

1  Matt.  5 : 1  f.  ;  8 :  10 ;  Lk.  18  : 1-8  ;  Matt.  17  :  20. 


42 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


ment  from  the  world  which  wears  the  appearance  of 
asceticism.'  The  parables  contain  the  deepest  teach- 
ing about  the  kingdom,  but  this  teaching  is  based  on 
the  doctrine  of  man  contained  in  them.  Humanity  in 
the  parables  is  the  soil  in  which  the  word  of  the  king- 
dom is  sown.  The  first  and  most  obvious  truth  about 
this  soil  is  the  variety  of  hindrance  which  it  presents 
to  the  growth  and  fruitfulness  of  the  seed.  Spiritual 
dulness,  superficiality,  worldliness,  are  enemies  within 
man  to  the  truth.''  The  second  truth  is  that  besides 
the  children  of  truth  planted  by  God,  there  are  the 
children  of  the  evil  one.^  That  is,  both  forces,  both 
good  and  evil,  are  at  work  in  the  world.  The  third 
truth  is,  however,  the  fundamental  one,  that  seed  and 
soil  are  so  adapted  that  the  earth  produces  fruit  of 
itself.  There  is  at  bottom  an  affinity  between  the 
spirit  of  man  and  the  truth  of  God,  so  that  humanity 
is  the  proper  soil  for  the  growth  of  the  word.*  Man 
is  made  to  believe  the  truth,  and  this  is  the  ultimate 
ground  for  believing  in  the  establishment  of  the  king- 
dom in  the  world.  The  essential  truth  in  regard  to 
human  nature  is  thus  optimistic,  not  pessimistic. 
Growing  out  of  the  two,  however,  the  more  obvious 
evil  side  of  humanity  and  the  hidden  deeper  side  of 
good,  we  have  finally  the  fourth  truth,  that  the  growth 
of  the  kingdom  is  slow  but  sure.  It  advances  slowly 
toward  its  goal,  but  the  end  is  surely  reached  at  last. 
This  truth  about  human  nature,  that  it  is  superficially 
alien  to  the  kingdom,  but  fimdamentally  akin  to  it,  is 
our  Lord's  undeniable  teaching.  And  it  is  evident, 
too,  that  he  proceeds  on  this  supposition  in  his  teach- 
ing, in  which  he  appeals  to  what  is  in  man,  and  devel- 
opes  what  he  finds  there.     It  is  very  true  that  man's 


1  Matt.  11 
a  Matt.  13 ; 


19. 
1-8. 


«  Matt.  13  :  24-30,  36-43. 
*  Mk.  4 :  26-29. 


JESUS'   CONCEPTION  OF  MAN  43 

salvation  depends  on  the  implanting  in  him  of  a  divine 
force,  but  the  fact  about  man  which  is  developed  here 
is  not  so  much  his  admitted  sinfulness  as  his  dormant 
capacity  for  receiving  this  divine  force  into  his  life.^ 

1  On  Jesus'  teaching  as  to  man,  see  Bruce,  The  Kingdom  of 
God,  128-147  ;  Schmeid,  Biblical  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  VOsq.; 
Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  92-103  ;  Beyschlag,  New 
Testament  Theology,  I,  88-93 ;  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche 
Theologie,  I,  113  sq.;  160  sq. ;  Mathews,  Social  Teaching  of 
Jesus,  ch.  2 ;  Laidlaw,  The  Bible  Doctrine  of  Man. 


CHAPTEE  VI 


DOCTRINE  OF  LAST  THINGS 


In  the  main,  Jesus  teaches  about  the  last  things  just 
those  elementary  truths  which  are  among  the  funda- 
mental facts  of  religion :  —  that  men  are  immortal,  and 
that  their  state  hereafter  depends  on  their  conduct 
here,^  More  particularly,  it  depends  on  the  good  or  ill 
which  they  do  their  brethren,  which  Jesus  represents 
as  done  to  him.*  He  represents  himself  as  the  Judge, 
that  being  a  part  of  his  kingly  office. 

Simple  as  are  these  teachings,  Jesus  has  been  sub- 
ject to  the  most  singular  misunderstanding  from  the 
very  beginning.  The  last  things  of  which  he  speaks 
are  not  the  end  of  the  world,  but  of  the  age.  And 
the  period  so  ended  is  not  that  of  the  world,  but  of 
the  age.'  More  particularly,  it  is  the  end  of  the 
Jewish  epoch  in  connection  with  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem.*  The  passages  in  the  eschatological  dis- 
course which  are  supposed  to  point  unmistakably  to 
an  actual  return  of  Jesus  at  the  end  of  the  world,  are 
really  intended  to  teach  something  very  different. 
They  represent  this  return  as '  immediately  following 
"  the  tribulation  of  those  days,"  and  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  "  the  tribulation  of  those  days  "  is  the  siege 
and  destruction  of  Jerusalem  (vs.  21).  The  whole 
passage  gets  its  subject  from  the  conversation  about 


1  Matt.  22 :  23-53  ;  Lk.  16  :  19-^1. 
»  Matt.  13  :  39,  49  ;  24  :  3. 
*  Matt.  24  :  29  sq.;  Mk.  13  :  24. 
44 


2  Matt.  25  :  31-46. 


6  Matt.  24  :  29. 


DOCTRINE  OF  LAST  THINGS  45 

the  destruction  of  the  temple  (vss.  1,  2).     In  Mk.  13/ 

the  discourse  takes  precisely  the  same  course,  .except 
that  the  coming  of  the  Lord  is  said  to  be  in  those  days, 
after  that  tribulation.  The  first  of  these  designations 
of  time  refers  to  the  general  period,  that  is,  that  of  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  second  specifies  the 
time  after  the  destruction  of  the  city  as  the  particular 
time  of  the  coming.  Then  in  both,  after  the  entire 
statement  is  in,  including  both  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem and  the  coming  of  the  Lord  which  is  to  follow 
it,  it  is  distinctly  said  that  the  generation  was  not  to 
pass  away  until  all  these  things  are  accomplished.' 
According  to  this,  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  must 
be  something  other  than  a  visible  coming.  There  must 
be  some  prophetic  use  of  language  covering  cases  of 
this  kind,  in  which  the  words  have  not  their  literal 
meaning,  but  an  entirely  allowable  and  reasonable  rhe- 
torical meaning.  And  as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  is  such 
a  use  frequent  in  the  Old  Testament  prophecies,  where 
any  divine  interference  in  human  affairs,  and  especially 
in  the  destruction  of  dynasties,  is  represented  under 
just  this  figure  of  God  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven, 
accompanied  by  his  angels,  and  attended  by  all  these 
portents,  such  as  the  falling  of  the  stars,  the  darken- 
ing of  sun  and  moon,  the  shaking  of  the  powers  of 
heaven,  and  the  like.^    Finally  there  is  one  passage 

1  The  attempt  of  Wendt,  Lehre  Jesu,  I,  to  discover  two 
apocalypses  in  this  chapter  of  Mark  is  certainly  ingenious 
though  hardly  beyond  objections.  Ilis  first  eschatological  ele- 
ment, vss.  6  f,,  9,  11-13,  21-23,  28  f.,  he  regards  as  coming  from 
Jesus,  while  vss.  7-9a,  14-20,  24-27  f.,  30,  he  holds  to  be  an  early 
Christian  apocalypse  which  has  been  combined  with  these 
sayings  of  Jesus. 

2  Mk.  13  :  30  ;  Matt.  24  :  .34. 

8  See,  for  instance,  Is.  13  :  9,  10  ;  24  :  21-23 ;  Ezek.  32  :  7- 
10 ;  Joel  2 :  10,  30,  31  ;  Dan.  7  :  13.  These  figures  are  also 
frequent  in  the  later  Jewish  literature. 


46 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


which  shows  conclusively  how  this  language  is  to  be 
taken.  Matt.  26 :  64  says,  "  From  this  time  on,  you 
will  see  the  Son  of  Man  seated  at  the  right  hand  of 
power,  and  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven."  The 
point  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the  note  of  time,  which 
does  not  make  the  coming  of  our  Lord  to  be  a  single 
event  occurring  at  some  point  of  time,  but  a  continuous 
happening,  which  is  to  characterise  the  period  begin- 
ning then  and  there.  There  is  a  sense,  then,  in  which 
he  is  to  come  within  that  generation,  and  another  sense 
in  which  he  will  be  seated  at  the  right  hand  of  power 
continuously  from  the  time  of  his  departure  from  this 
world,  and  be  continually  appearing  here  in  the  world 
during  the  same  period.  The  coming  at  the  time  of 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  gives  us  the  clew  to  the 
meaning  of  both.  That,  as  we  have  seen,  is  analogous 
to  Old  Testament  passages  in  which  any  interference 
by  God  in  the  affairs  of  nations  is  represented  under 
this  figure  of  a  coming.  Every  such  providential  hap- 
pening in  the  history  of  the  world,  after  our  Lord's 
departure  from  it,  is  to  be  looked  upon  as  a  part  of  his 
administration  of  it.  It  is  an  interruption  of  the  ordi- 
nary course  of  things,  in  which  the  slow  process  of  the 
growth  of  the  kingdom  is  hastened  by  some  crisis,  such 
as  the  breaking  up  of  the  Roman  Empire,  the  Reform- 
ation, the  American  Revolution,  and  the  like.  But, 
meantime,  Jesus  is  king  just  as  much  in  the  ordinary 
times  that  intervene. 

One  important  consequence  of  this  is  that  the  judg- 
ment which  figures  so  conspicuously  in  the  Advent 
is  likewise  a  continuous  process,  and  not  a  rounding 
up  of  things  at  the  end  of  the  world.  The  Jewish 
nation,  and  other  nations,  in  which  things  have  come 
to  a  like  crisis,  are  subject  to  judgments  which  close 
up  their  affairs,  but  in  the  world  at  large  it  is  the 
redemptive  process  which  makes  the  splendid  climax 


DOCTRINE  OF  LAST  THINGS  47 

and  not  the  judgment  process,  for  this  is  merely  pre- 
paratory.^ Single  passages  like  these  might  not  have 
much  weight,  if  they  were  not  a  part  of  a  great  im- 
pression made  by  our  Lord,  that  love  is  that  attri- 
bute in  God  which  not  only  outweighs  but  outlasts 
everything  else.  The  teaching  of  the  parables  is  the 
clearest  teaching  in  the  New  Testament  in  regard  to  the 
manner  of  establishing  the  kingdom,  and  this  teaching 
is  clearly  at  variance  with  the  supposition  of  a  sudden  Reversion  to 
or  early  winding  up  of  the  world's  affairs.  Over  programme'' 
against  it  stands  the  Jewish  Messianic  programme,  fo'  thecom- 
which  sets  up  a  victorious  force  in  the  world,  instead  kingdom, 
of  a  slow-working  principle.  Yet  although  this  me- 
chanical and  sudden  social  regeneration  is  foreign  to 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  himself,  after  the  short  interval 
of  a  generation,  instead  of  the  insistence  upon  gro^vth, 
there  is  predicted  a  return  to  this  Judaistic  programme. 
The  teaching  of  the  parables  was  thereby  made  a  tem- 
porary device,  which  was  set  aside  after  this  short  time, 
and  a  return  made  to  the  other  medium  of  force,  which 
all  of  Jesus'  teachings  controvert.  The  present  gen- 
eral teaching  of  a  visible  return  of  Jesus,  either  shortly, 
or  after  an  indefinitely  deferred  period,  is  clearly  un- 
tenable. It  leaves  out  of  view  the  fact,  that  whatever 
was  predicted  by  our  Lord  was  to  take  place  within 
the  generation  succeeding  his  death.  There  is  a  con- 
sensus of  scholars  about  this,  the  only  question  being 
whether  he  made  a  mistake  or  not.  And  it  is  clearly 
against  the  supposition  that  he  did  make  a  mistake, 
that  he  sets  forth  in  the  parables  a  statement  of  the 
slow  growth  of  the  kingdom  which  clearly  contradicts 
the  idea  of  an  early  coming.''    Thus,  in  one  sense,  the 

1  Matt.  5  :  43-48  ;  6 :  9,  10  ;  Lk.  15  : 4,  8  ;  Matt.  13  :  33. 

*  For  a  careful  discussion  of  the  critical  aspects  of  the  escha- 
tological  passions  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  see  Stevens,  Theol- 
ogy of  the  N  T.,  150-166. 


48  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  occurred  at  the  destruction 
of  the  Jewish  state,  but  in  another  sense  it  is  con- 
tinually happening,  the  great  crises  in  the  history  of 
the  world  being  really  comings  of  the  Son  of  Man. 
These  judgments  of  the  nations  are  a  part  of  the 
process  for  the  final  setting  up  of  the  kingdom.  But 
this  final  act  will  not  be  a  judgment  process,  but  the 
final  entire  submission  of  the  will  of  man  to  the  will 
of  God. 

Jesus,  thus,  claims  for  himself  to  be  the  fulfilment 
of  the  Messianic  expectation  of  the  Jews,  —  their  hope 
Summary  of  for  one  anointed  by  God  to  rule  his  people  and  to  deliver 
teachin**^      them  from  their  enemies.     But  the  idea  in  this  which 
he  seizes  and  holds  fast  is  that  it  is  the  kingdom  of 
God  which  he  is  to  establish.     In  other  words,  it  is 
the  rule  of  righteousness  which  he  is  to  establish. 
God  and  his  righteousness  were  to  be  made  the  ruling 
powers  in  the  world,  not  the  Jews,  nor  even  himself, 
except  as  he    represented  God    and    righteousness. 
The  king-       This  glad  tidings,  that  this  kingdom  was  to  be  set  up, 
dom.  ^g^g  proclaimed  fii-st  to  the  Jews  because  they  were 

^  }/        I     the  only  worshippers  of  the  true  God,  by  which  is 
iAttr  I      meant  the  one  and  righteous  God,  and  because  as  such 

the  foundations  of  the  new  kingdom  were  to  be  laid 
y[f'^  in  their  race.     But  Jesus   shows  very  early  in  his 

teaching  that  he  does  not  expect  the  nation  to  be 
friendly  to  this  kingdom,  that  in  this  new  and  ideal 
form  in  which  alone  it  could  take  its  place  among  the 
spiritual  realities  of  this  world,  it  was  to  meet  nothing 
but  the  deadliest  hostility  of  those  who  represented 
the  idea  in  its  older  material  form.  In  that  form  it 
promised  selfish  aggrandizement;  in  its  new  form  it 
meant  self-abnegation  as  the  very  root  of  all  things. 
It  meant  the  substitution  of  a  rational  spiritual  right- 
eousness for  the  formal  righteousness  that  obtained  in 


hOCTBINE  OF  LAST  THINGS  49 

the  present  form  of  the  kingdom.  This  meant  that 
the  condition  which  Jesus  was  to  meet  and  deal  with 
in  the  establishment  of  the  kingdom  was  a  universal  Sinfulness, 
sinfulness,  from  which  the  Jews  were  not  to  be 
excluded.  And  among  the  Jews  the  deadliest  form  of 
sin,  which  consists  in  bitter  hostility  to  the  kingdom, 
and  yet  plumes  itself  on  its  righteousness,  was  found 
among  the  professed  righteous  and  not  among  the  pro- 
fessed sinners.  The  first  thing  to  which  Jesus  had  to 
address  himself  in  his  teaching  was  the  revision  of 
the  idea  of  righteousness  and  of  God.  Evidently,  if 
the  religious  heads  of  the  nation  were  the  worst  sin- 
ners of  their  times,  so  that  their  religion  was  a  mere 
pretext,  the  whole  religious  idea  would  have  to  be 
reversed.  In  the  matter  of  the  law,  this  revision  con-  Righteous- 
sisted  in  the  absolute  rationalising  and  spiritualising  f^^  *°** 
of  it,  so  that  it  should  stand  as  a  statement  of  the 
obligation  that  the  very  nature  and  spirit  of  God 
would  impose  on  man.  It  dealt  with  motives,  there- 
fore, and  principles,  but  above  all,  put  love  at  the  front 
as  the  complete  statement  of  God's  will  in  regard  to 
man.  In  regard  to  God,  it  dwelt  not  on  the  mysteries  God. 
of  his  being,  but  on  the  transparent  depths  of  his  ethical 
nature,  and  here,  again,  put  love  to  the  front  as  the  very 
essence  of  what  Jesus  had  to  say  about  God  as  Father. 
Jesus  proposed  to  himself,  therefore,  to  conquer  the 
world  for  God  by  teaching  the  world  the  truth  about 
God  and  his  will,  Nothing  could  better  show  the 
spirituality  and  strangeness  of  his  idea  of  the  kingdom 
than  this  fact,  that  he,  its  king,  was  in  his  outward 
activity  a  teacher.  He  was  a  prophet,  who  expected,  Jesus  a 
like  the  rest  of  the  prophets,  to  be  persecuted  to  the  P^^^P^®*- 
death.  This  fate  was  not  prevented  by  his  possession 
of  miraculous  power.  Whether  it  was  a  power  left  at 
his  disposal,  or  one  restricted  to  certain  uses,  either 
in  the  one  case  on  his  part,  or  in  the  other  case  on  the 

B 


50 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Salvation, 
not  judg- 
ment, the 
end  of  the 
world  pro- 
cess. 


part  of  God,  there  was  a  seK-restraint  in  the  exercise 
of  an  unlimited  power  in  the  interest  of  human  freedom. 
And  now  that  he  has  ascended,  the  imrestricted  power 
is  limited  in  the  same  way  and  in  the  same  interest, 
since  he  warns  his  disciples  to  expect  the  same  fate  as 
himself,  until  they  can  bring  the  world  which  perse- 
cutes into  the  same  obedience  as  themselves. 

As  to  the  goal  to  which  the  world  tends,  it  is  not 
judgment  but  salvation.  The  world  process  is  not  to 
be  closed  with  an  act  of  judgment  but  of  triumph. 
Society  is  to  be  leavened,  and  the  will  of  God  is  to  be 
done  on  earth  as  in  heaven.  The  judgment  is  inter- 
mediate, continuous,  and  contributory.^ 

In  regard  to  himself,  Jesus  teaches  that  he  is  the 
being  in  earth  and  heaven  set  to  bring  all  this  about, 
and  under  God  to  act  as  king  in  this  spiritual  realm.' 

1  On  his  eschatology,  see  Wendt,  Teaching  of  Jesus,  II,  265- 
286 ;  Bruce,  The  Kingdom  of  God,  311-328 ;  Horton,  The 
Teaching  of  Jesus,  139-153  ;  Weiss,  Biblical  Theology  of  the 
N.  T.,  1, 143-158  ;  Stevens,  The  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  150-lGG  ; 
Beyschlag,  New  Teatament  Theology,  I,  187-215 ;  Holtzmann, 
Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  I,  305-337  ;  Bovon,  Theologie  du 
Nouv.  Testament,  I,  453-474 ;  Stanton,  The  Jeioish  and  Chris- 
tian Messiah,  298-356;  Salmon,  TTie  Christian  Doctrine  of 
Immortality,  2SS-298  ;  Salmon,  Art.  "Eschatology,"  in  Hast- 
ings' Diet.  ;  Gilbert,  The  Bevelation  of  Jesus,  284-361 ;  Balden- 
sperger,  Selbstbewusstsein  Jesu,  chs.  8,  9  ;  Charles,  Eschatology, 
Hebrew,  Jewish,  and  Christian,  oh.  9 ;  Russel,  The  Parousia, 
Pt.  I ;  Haupt,  Die  eschatologischen  Aussagen  Jesu  in  den 
synoptischen  Evangelien;  Schwartzkopff,  JTie  Prophecies  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

2  On  the  Messianic  self-consciousness  of  Jesus,  see  Balden- 
sperger.  Das  Selbstbeicusstsein  Jesu;  Adamson,  TTie  Mind  in 
Christ;  Wendt,  Teaching  of  Jesus,  II,  122-339;  Schwai-tz- 
kopff,  The  Prophecies  of  Jesus  Christ;  Stalker,  The  Christol- 
ogy  of  Jcsv.k;  Forrest,  The  Christ  of  History  and  Experience  ; 
Burton,  "The  Personal  Religion  of  Jesus,"  Biblical  World, 
December,  1899. 


PART  II 

THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE 

The  sources  of  this  early  teaching  are  to  be  found  The  sources, 
in  the  history  and  discourses  of  the  early  chapters  of  ' 
Acts.  These  have  to  be  studied  in  connection  with 
the  statements  of  the  Pauline  Epistles  about  the  rela- 
tions of  Paul  and  the  Twelve.  And  if  we  accept  the 
Petrine  source  of  Mark,  and  the  tradition  that  Mat- 
thew was  the  author  of  the  Logia,  the  second  source  of 
i;he  Synoptics,  we  have  to  distinguish  between  an 
earlier  and  a  later  teaching.  Because,  as  we  have  seen, 
here  is  a  body  of  teaching  entirely  in  sympathy  with 
Paul's  opposition  to  the  ceremonial  part  of  the  law,  and 
therefore  quite  out  of  sympathy  with  the  obvious  atti- 
tude of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  toward  Paul.  When 
we  speak  of  the  Jerusalem  Church  in  this  connection, 
it  is  certainly  impossible  to  leave  out  the  leaders, 
although  they  may  not  have  been  quite  so  prejudiced 
as  their  followers.  There  must  have  been  quite  a 
change  in  the  spirit  of  the  Jerusalem  Church,  before 
so  sympathetic  a  report  of  our  Lord's  teaching  as  that 
contained  in  Mark  and  Matthew  could  have  come  from 
two  of  the  original  apostles.  Por,  while  that  teaching 
is  not  in  accord  with  Paul's  peculiar  doctrine  of 
the  law,  it  is  quite  in  sympathy  with  his  practical 
object  to  free  men  from  bondage  to  the  ceremonial 
part  of  the  law. 

These  discourses  in  the  early  chapters  of  Acts  are 
not  historical  in  the  sense  that  they  are  verbatim 

51 


62  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

reports  of  separate  addresses,  but  in  that  they  preserve 
for  us  a  type  of  teaching  that  correctly  represents  the 
apostles  at  this  time.^  They  are  historical,  as  the  Ser- 
mon on  the  Mount  was  historical.  They  profess  to 
give  an  account  of  the  witness  of  the  early  disciples 
to  the  crucified,  risen,  and  ascended  Lord,  and  their 
prophecy  of  his  early  return  to  establish  his  kingdom. 
Of  this  office  of  witness  the  apostles  speak  constantly." 
Especially  do  they  regard  themselves  as  witnesses  of 
the  resurrection,  which  is  the  foundation  of  their  faith.^ 
Indeed,  they  dwell  as  our  Lord  did  not,  on  external 
signs,  such  as  our  Lord's  miracles,  the  resurrection, 
and  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit.*  Evidently,  they 
distinguish  between  the  earthly  office  of  Jesus,  which 
they  regard  as  mainly  prophetic,*  while  it  is  in  his 
exaltation  that  he  becomes  Prince,  Lord,  and  Messiah.* 
During  his  life,  he  is  anointed  by  God  with  the  Holy 

1  For  different  views  as  to  these  discourses,  see  Weizsacker, 
Apostolic  Age,  1, 209  sq.,  241  sq.  ;  Holtzmann,  Hand-Commentar 
zum  Neuen  Testament,  307  sq. ;  Jiilicher,  Einleitung  in  d.  Neue 
Testament,  259  sq. ;  Blass,  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1894,  86- 
119;  Blass,  Acta  Apostolorum  secundum  formam  Romanam 
(for  a  criticism  of  Blass,  see  Schmiedel,  Art.  "Acts,"  Encyclo- 
pedia Biblica)  ;  Lightfoot,  Art.  "Acts,"  Sraitii,  Bib.  Diet.; 
Headlam,  Art.  "Acts,"  Hastings'  Diet.;  McGiffert,  The  Apos- 
tolic Age,  234  sq.,  436  sq.;  Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  the  Traveller 
and  Boman  Citizen,  1-28,  383  sq. ;  Mathews,  "The  Origin  of 
Acts  9  : 1-19,"  Biblical  World,  October,  1898  ;  Barde,  Commen- 
taire  sur  les  Actesdes  Apotres,  574  sq.;  Spitta,  Die  Apostelge- 
schichte,  285-380 ;  Jiingst,  Die  Quellen  der  Apostelgeschichtc, 
191-221;  J.  Weiss,  Ut,ber  die  Absicht  undderiliterar.  Character 
der  Apostelgeschichten  ;  Hilgenfeld,  Arts,  in  Z.fur  W.  Th.,  1895. 

2  Acts  1  :  8,  11  ;  2  :  32  ;  3  :  15  ;  10  :  39  ;  4  :  33  ;  6  :  32. 

8  Acts  1  :  22  ;  4:2,  10  ;  4  :  33  ;  3  :  15  ;  6  :  30  ;  10  :  40-42. 

4  Acts  1:8;  4  :  8-12,  31  ;  5  :  30-32. 

'  Acts  3 :  22  ;  7  :  37.  He  was  the  Messiah  but  had  not  per- 
formed strictly  Messianic  work.  This  was  to  be  the  purpose 
of  his  return . 

6  Acts  2  :  33,  36  ;  3  :  14-16  ;  4  :  29-31. 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE 


53 


Spirit  and  power.  But  now  in  his  exaltation  he  sends 
the  Holy  Spirit.^  His  title  with  them  is  commonly 
o  Trais  avTov  (tov  6eov)  Servant  of  Yahweh,  the  pro- 
phetic title  of  the  elect  Israel  in  Isaiah,  which  in  the 
later  usage  is  appropriated  to  Messianic  use.^  In  this 
exaltation,  his  office  is  principally  that  of  Prince  of 
life  and  Saviour  to  give  repentance  and  remission  of 
sins.  It  is  a  period  of  transition,  therefore,  from  the 
merely  prophetic  work  of  the  earthly  life  to  the  purely 
kingly  office  which  is  to  characterise  his  return  to  the 
earth.^  It  is  necessary  to  keep  these  offices  distin- 
guished in  order  to  understand  this  teaching.  Accord- 
ing to  the  addresses  in  Acts,  during  his  life,  Jesus  was 
himself  a  prophet  anointed  by  the  Holy  Spirit;  during 
his  temporary  sojourn  in  heaven  he  sends  the  Spirit  to 
inspire  his  apostles  for  the  same  work ;  and  on  his 
return  from  heaven  he  is  to  be  finally  crowned  as 
King,  his  enemies  are  to  be  subdued,  and  he  is  to  be 
established  as  Judge.*  Every  person  who  shall  not 
listen  to  the  prophet  sent  by  God  is  to  be  destroyed 
from  among  the  people.  The  present  office  of  the  risen 
Jesus  is  therefore  to  turn  them  away  from  their 
iniquities,  that  so  they  may  be  preserved  from  that 
fate. 

The  death  of  Jesus  is  not  regarded  by  the  early 
disciples  as  atoning  or  vicarious.  Indeed,  they  do 
not  rationalise  it  in  any  way.  It  would  be  singular 
if  they  had,  just  because  they  had  seen  in  it  the  great 
hindrance  to  his  work  and  to  their  belief.  It  was 
enough  for  them  that  this  stumbling-block  had  been 
removed  by  his  resurrection.  They  recognised  in  him 
now  the  risen  and  ascended  Lord,  exercising  the  spiritual 

1  Acts  2  :  33. 

2  Is.  41  :  8  ;  42  :  19  ;  44  :  1  sq.,  21,  etc. 
»  Acts  4  :  12  ;  5  :  31  ;  10  :  43. 

*  Acts  3 :  19-21,  and  especially,  23,  26. 


54 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


powers  of  his  kingdom  in  heaven  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  and  about  to  return  to  set  up  his  kingdom  here. 
It  was  enough  for  them  to  know  that  his  death  was 
by  God's  set  plan,  foretold  in  prophecy,  and  therefore 
the  farthest  possible  from  being  a  defeat.^ 

As  to  the  person  of  our  Lord,  there  is  the  same 
primitiveness,  the  mark  of  an  early  and  unreflective 
period,  as  in  the  rest  of  their  simple  doctrine.  He  is 
to  them  the  Messiah,  back  of  whom  stands  the  mighty 
power  of  God,  attested  by  signs  which  God  gives  him 
to  perform,  by  his  own  resurrection  which  God  accom- 
plishes, by  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  has  been 
promised  him  by  the  Father.  In  heaven  as  on  earth, 
he  is  commissioned,  attested,  exalted,  empowered  by 
God,  but  there  is  no  hint  of  a  more  intimate  relation.' 
To  be  sure,  miracles  are  performed  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  and  he  gives  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  both  are 
traced  back  to  God,  who  in  them  glorifies  his  servant 
Jesus.^ 

Jesus  was  to  the  first  Christians  not  only  the  Mes- 
siah ;  he  was  the  Jewish  Messiah,  We  need  not  look 
for  any  specific  proof  of  this  within  the  discourses  them- 
selves, as  it  was  not  a  controverted  point.  There  is 
evidently  an  expectation  that  his  Messianic  work  and 
blessings  will  somehow  transcend  Israel,  but  the  bless- 
ing must  come  first  to  the  chosen  people,  and  only 
through  them  to  others.*  But  when  the  CorHelius 
event  happened,  they  of  the  circumcision  were  amazed 
at  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
glorified  God  for  the  gift  of  repentance  to  the  Gen- 
tiles.*   More  than  this,  Christianity  was  to  them  no 

1  Acts  2  :  2S-36  ;  3 :  18  ;  4  :  27,  28. 

a  Acts  2 :  22, 24,  32-36  ;  3 :  13-16, 20,  26 ;  4 :  10,  30 ;  5 :  30-32. 

«  Acts  3  :  13  ;  2  :  33. 

*  Acts  3 :  25,  26. 

»  Acts  10  :  46  ;  11 :  18. 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  65 

separate  thing,  it  was  genuine  Judaism,  and  they 
joined,  therefore,  assiduously  in  the  worship  of  the  tem- 
ple.^ The  significance  of  this  lies  not  in  the  fact  that 
they  joined  in  this  worship,  but  in  the  assiduousness  of 
their  attendance.  Jesus  was  also  a  Jew,  but  the  free- 
dom with  which  he  moved  among  the  Jewish  customs 
and  laws  was  the  principal  occasion  of  the  hatred  that 
he  encountered.  So  far  was  this  the  case  that  to  him 
Jerusalem  was  forbidden  ground.  But  after  his  death, 
the  disciples'  assiduous  following  of  the  temple  service 
gave  them  favour  with  all  the  people.  And  when 
Stephen  was  accused  of  repeating  Jesus'  prophecy  of 
the  destruction  of  the  temple,  and  the  passing  of  the 
Jewish  cult,  the  strenuous  opposition  to  him  is  in 
marked  opposition  to  the  previous  peace  of  the 
Church.' 

In  these  discourses  we  have  set  forth,  therefore,  the  Summary. 
very  simple  and  reactionary  faith  of  our  Lord's  early 
disciples  after  his  final  departure.  His  death  had 
clouded  their  faith,  but  his  resurrection  had  reestab- 
lished it,  and  their  testimony  to  this  fact  was  that  on 
which  they  mainly  relied  to  prove  his  Messiahship. 
That  set  the  whole  thing  on  its  feet  once  more.  The 
difficulty  of  his  death  once  out  of  the  way,  they  could 
go  back  to  his  miracles,  and  rehearse  once  more  the 
wonders  which  had  always  seemed  to  them,  as  they 
never  had  to  Jesus,  the  great  thing  in  his  life.     But 

1  Acts  2:  46;  3:1;  21:20. 

2  On  Primitive  Christianity,  see  Bruce,  Apologetics,  430-447  ; 
McGiffert,  The  Apostolic  Age,  chs.  2-4 ;  Weizsacker,  TTie 
Apostolic  Age,  I ;  Lechler,  T%e  Apostolic  and  Post-Apos- 
tolic Times,  I,  5-268 ;  Thatcher,  Tlie  Apostolic  Church,  chs. 
1-8  ;  Bartlett,  The  Apostolic  Age,  1-203 ;  Neander,  Planting 
and  Training,  bk.  I ;  Wendt,  Handbuch  ilber  die  Apostel- 
geschichte  (Meyer  series)  ;  Baur,  Church  History,  I,  1-43 ; 
Cone,  The  Gospel  and  its  Earliest  Interpretations,  chs.  2-6 ; 
Pfleiderer,  Das  Urchristenthum. 


56 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


they  not  only  had  their  confidence  in  his  Messianic 
office  restored,  they  had  his  Messianic  career  marked 
out  for  him.  His  sudden  taking  off  had  seemed  to 
cut  that  career  short,  but  now  the  knowledge  that  he 
had  ascended  to  the  right  hand  of  God  meant  the 
exercise  of  his  Messianic  office  there.  This  power 
committed  into  his  hands  by  God  was  shown  mainly 
in  his  sending  upon  them  the  Holy  Spirit,  which 
enabled  them  to  speak  the  truth  about  him  with  a 
power  which  was  a  revelation  to  themselves,  and  to 
perform  miracles  such  as  had  graced  his  own  life. 
But  even  this  heavenly  sojourn  was  only  temporary, 
and  prepared  the  way  for  what  was,  after  all,  the 
culmination,  indeed,  the  realisation,  of  his  Messianic 
career,  his  return  to  the  earth  to  assume  here  his  real 
sovereignty.  Meantime  in  heaven  his  principal  office 
was  the  restoration  of  Israel  to  repentance  for  remis- 
sion of  sins.  It  was  the  nation,  the  seed  of  Abraham, 
which  he  was  thus  to  make  a  blessing  to  the  world. 
This  was  the  side  of  his  Messianic  office  turned  toward 
his  own  people,  the  Jews.  Their  sin  as  a  people  had 
culminated  in  their  rejection  of  him,  but  they  were  to 
be  restored  to  the  old  paths  by  the  exercise  of  spiritual 
powers  vested  in  him  on  his  ascension.  The  other 
side  was  the  subduing  of  his  enemies,  so  that  on  his 
return  to  the  earth  he  would  reign  over  the  whole 
world  with  the  Jewish  quarter  as  the  court  end  of  the 
town.  That  is,  the  Jewish  Messianic  programme  is 
reestablished,  with  only  the  unexpected  interlude  of 
the  spiritual  reign  in  heaven,  preparatory  to  the  final 
setting  up  of  the  kingdom  on  the  earth.  This  they 
look  forward  to  within  their  generation,  and  liable  to 
occur  at  any  time,  and  this  expectation  constitutes  the 
hope  of  the  Church  in  the  first  century,  and  the  secret 
of  its  buoyant  life.  Meantime,  as  their  hope  is  the 
Messianic  hope,  they  relax  none  of  their  Judaism; 


THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TWELVE  57 

indeed,  they  become  objects  of  favourable  notice  on 

account  of  their  strictness,  and  the  fervour  of  their 

devotion  to  the  Jewish  cult.     The  testimony  of  Acts 

21 :  20,  21,  as  to  the  zealous  legality  of   the  entire  ,y 

Jewish  Church  is  conclusive  as  to  the  attitude  of  the  ^  *  -    V|*t 

Twelve,  arid'as  the  spiritual  work  of  the  Messiah  dur-^^,<^     ,  'i^ 

ing  his  stay  in  heaven  was  to  be  the  restoration  of  the        J     V 

Jews,  and  only  through  this  restored  Israel  was  to 

come  the  blessing  of  the  other  nations,  the  attention 

of  the  apostles  was  confined  to  the  Jews,  and  there 

was  no  thought  of  any  work  among  the  Gentiles.^ 

1  It  is,  perhaps,  significant  that  even  the  evangelisation  of 
Samaria  was  the  work  of  Philip,  apparently  a  Hellenistic  Jew, 
and  certainly  not  one  of  the  Twelve. 


PART  III 
THE  TEACHING  OF  PAUL 

CHAPTER  I 
SIN  AND  THE  LAW 

What  the  early  disciples  effected  was  a  reaction. 
What  Paul  effected  in  the  midst  of  this  reaction  was 
a  revolution,  and  it  was  due  to  his  inside  view  of  Juda- 
ism. He  knew  what  it  meant  to  try  to  be  religious 
after  the  Jewish  fashion.  The  righteousness  of  the 
law  he  had  striven  to  attain,  and  he  found  himself  a 
sinner,  with  unsatisfied  longings,  after  it  all.  His  con- 
fessions show  that  he  had  this  conviction  of  sin  as  a 
Jew,  before  his  contact  with  Christianity.  And  the 
circle  was  complete  when  he  found  in  Christ  what  he 
had  failed  to  find  in  law,  an  inspiration  that  lifted  his 
endeavour  after  righteousness  out  of  the  dead  level  of 
rules  into  the  high  places  of  exalted  motives.^ 

In  order  to  understand  his  position,  we  have  to  begin 
with  the  practical  question  which  he  debates  in  both 
«pistles  in  which  he  discusses  the  law.  The  party 
of  reaction  had  demanded  that  his  Gentile  converts  be 
circumcised.  And  his  difficulty  with  the  law  is  that 
it  contained  those  demands  which  became  his  reason 
for  setting  aside  the  law  altogether.     He  argues  the 

1  Rom.  7  :  7-26. 
58 


SIN  AND  THE  LAW 


69 


case  at  times  as  Jesus  would,  contending  that  forms 
are  not  on  the  same  footing  as  the  moral  requirements 
of  the  law.  Circumcision  is  a  sign  of  conformity  to 
the  law,  the  badge  of  the  people  of  the  law.  And  as 
such,  it  avails  a  man  only  if  he  has  that  inward  quality 
which  the  sign  stands  for.  And  if  he  has  that  inward 
quality,  it  makes  up  for  the  absence  of  the  outward 
sign.^  Paul  argues  the  matter  of  eating  food  offered  to 
idols,  and  all  attempts  to  make  the  matter  of  eating 
this  or  that,  one  of  moral  discriminations,  in  the  same 
rational,  spiritual  way.^  He  felt  the  futility,  therefore, 
of  the  apostolic  position,  according  to  which  disciple- 
ship  to  Christ  only  increased  one's  devotion  to  the 
Jewish  cult.  But  there  was  another  thing  in  the 
Jerusalem  programme  which  he  could  see  was  equally 
futile  —  the  expectation  that  the  Messianic  purpose 
could  be  achieved  through  the  conversion  of  the  Jews 
that  they  might  be  used  as  a  spiritual  force  for  the 
conversion  of  the  Gentiles.  In  the  first  place,  he 
knew  it  had  been  only  by  a  spiritual  tour  de  force 
that  he  had  been  converted,  and  he  evidently  regarded  prerequisite 
his  as  so  far  a  representative  case  that  it  argued  the  Gentries!  *^ 
extreme  difficulty  of  any  conversion  of  the  nation 
without  a  supernatural  intervention  —  something 
hardly  to  be  expected  on  a  national  scale.  Then  he 
saw  the  clear  alternative;  either  the  Jews  must  be 
converted  out  of  their  Judaism  —  a  result  which  the 
state  of  things  in  the  Jewish  Church  showed  to  be 
entirely  improbable;  or  supposing  the  state  of  things  0\  k-H' 
in  the  Jewish  Church  to  be  copied  all  over  the  nation,  ' 
this  would  make  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles  simply  -' 
impossible.  The  only  thing  which  could  possibly 
supplant  any  specialised  religion  would  be  not  an- 
other specialised  faith,  but  only  a  universal  religion, 


1  Rom.  2  :  26-29. 


a  Rom.  14 ;  1  Cor.  8  ;  10  :  19-33. 


60 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


■which  could  appeal  to  the  common  humanity  of  all, 
and  not  to  the  religious  bent  of  some  one  race  or 
period.  His  call,  therefore,  to  become  the  apostle  to 
the  Gentiles  meant  the  definite  setting  aside  of  the 
Jewish-Christian  programme,  and  the  substitution  for 
it  of  a  direct  work  among  the  Gentiles.  The  impli- 
cation is  distinctly  drawn  that  it  was  not  to  be  Jews 
first  and  then  Gentiles,  but  Gentiles  first  and  then 
Jews,  after  they  have  been  stirred  by  jealousy  of  the 
Gentiles  who  had  moved  into  their  place.^ 

This  move  on  the  part  of  Paul,  however,  was  not  to 
go  unchallenged.  Certain  men  from  the  Jewish  Church 
followed  in  his  tracks,  and  began  to  teach  his  converts 
that  they  must  be  circumcised.  This  was  the  first  in- 
vasion of  the  peace  of  the  Church.  Paul  himself  had  been 
content  to  leave  the  Jewish  Church  to  its  own  devices, 
so  far  as  it  did  not  interfere  with  him.  But  this  attack 
on  the  religious  liberty  of  his  disciples  aroused  the  slum- 
bering forces  of  a  naturally  combative  mind,  and  he 
took  up  the  weapons  of  debate,  and  forced  the  fighting 
along  the  entire  line.  And  his  main  position  marked  a 
turning  point  in  the  debate,  which  was  otherwise  really 
the  controversy  of  Jesus  with  the  Pharisees,  of  prophet 
with  priest,  of  spiritual  religion  with  formalism.  The 
new  Pauline  element  is  the  attempt  to  do  away  with 
the  law,  and  substitute  faith  as  the  principle  of  right- 
eousness. Our  Lord,  following  in  the  line  of  the 
prophets,  proceeded  to  idealise  and  spiritualise  the 
law ;  Paul  proclaimed  the  abolition  of  law,  that  is,  not 
merely  the  ceremonial  requirements  of  Mosaism,  but 
law  in  general.*    That  he  did  not  stop  short  of  this, 

1  Rom.  11. 

'  The  distinction  between  vb/jjoi  and  6  vbfuo^  is  not  so  vital  as 
to  vitiate  this  statement,  vbfws  it  is  true  can  hardly  be  equiva- 
lent to  our  idea  of  law  in  its  cosmic  sense,  but  it  is  as  much  of 
an  approach  to  such  a  generalisation  as  was  possible  for  a  Jew. 


Sm  AND  THE  LAW  61 

either  at  the  ceremonial  part  of  the  law,  or  at  the  Jew- 
ish law  itself,  is  proved  by  these  facts.  (1)  He  included 
the  unwritten  law  of  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  the  writ- 
ten law  of  the  Jews  in  his  argument.  His  attempt  to 
prove  the  impossibility  of  righteousness  under  the  law 
includes  two  parts ;  the  first  directed  against  the  Gen- 
tiles, and  the  second  against  the  Jews.^  (2)  He  takes 
for  an  example  of  the  fact,  that  the  law  brings  death 
instead  of  life,  the  most  spiritual  command  in  the  code.' 
(3)  His  argument  was  not  against  the  imperfections  of 
the  law ;  his  contention  being  that  the  righteousness 
of  the  law  is  unattainable,  not  that  it  would  not  enti- 
tle men  to  be  considered  holy  if  attained.  (4)  It  is 
also  to  be  considered  that  the  righteousness  of  the  law 
comes  to  fulfilment  through  the  Spirit,  but  not  as  law. 
The  virtues  of  the  Decalogue  are  reproduced  in  the 
Christian,  but  not  under  the  constraint  of  law.  This 
means  that  law,  as  a  principle,  is  unavailing  to  procure 
obedience  to  its  own  provisions.  But  Jesus  idealised 
the  legal  principle,  as  well  as  the  contents  of  the  law, 
and  so  overcame  any  supposed  difficulty  in  this 
direction.  He  made  law  the  obligation  imposed  upon 
men  by  the  very  nature  of  God.  It  may  be  that  some- 
time it  will  become  natural  for  us  to  love,  as  now  it  is 
to  be  selfish,  but  shall  we  ever  lose  the  sense  that  it  is 
right  to  love  ?  And  that  is  what  we  mean  by  moral 
law ;  the  imperative  sense  that  certain  things  are  right. 

It  is  6  vSfiOi  so  abstracted  as  practically  to  destroy  the  idea  by 
cult-requirement.  See  Lightfoot,  Galatians,  p6/m)s  ;  Sanday  and 
Headlam,  Bomans,  58.  In  general,  see  Pfleiderer,  Paulinism, 
I,  68-90  ;  Bruce,  St.  PauVs  Conception  of  Christianity,  293- 
309 ;  Stevens,  Pauline  Theology,  160-198 ;  Beyschlag,  New  Testa- 
ment Theology,  II,  127  sq. ;  Holtzmaun,  Neutestamentliche  The- 
ologie,  II,  22-37  ;  Cone,  Paul,  the  Man,  the  Missionary,  and  the 
Teacher,  179-198 ;  M^n^goz,  Le  Peche  et  la  Eedemption  d'apres 
St.  Paul,  96-123  ;  Grafe,  Die  Paulinische  Lehre  vom  Gesetz. 
1  Rom.  1 :  18-32  ;  2  :  1-29.  «  Rom.  7  :  7-11. 


62  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Faith.  This,  then,  was  the  wide  generalisation  by  which  Paul 

reached  his  conclusion  that  circumcision  was  not  bind- 
ing. It  belonged  to  the  law,  and  the  law  itself  was 
abolished,  and  another  principle  of  righteousness  estab- 
lished in  its  stead.  The  principle  was  faith,  which  was 
as  old  as  Abraham,  but  which  had  acquired  the  rein- 
forcement of  a  new  object  and  inspiration  in  Christ. 
His  proposition  was,  that  we  are  made  righteous  by  faith 
without  the  works  of  law.  To  prove  this,  he  shows  first 
the  inefl&ciency  of  law  to  produce  righteousness.  In  re- 
gard to  the  Gentiles,  he  had  no  difficulty  in  proving  their 
sinfulness,  but  did  feel  it  necessary  to  show  that  their 
sin  was  inexcusable  by  appealing  to  the  fact  that  theirs 
was  no  venial  ignorance  of  the  law,  but  a  deliberate 
suppressio  veri.  They  knew  God,  not,  to  be  sure, 
through  revelation,  but  through  his  works ;  and  they 
knew  the  law,  not  as  it  was  written  out  for  them  in  a 

Unright-  code,  but  as  it  was  written  within.^  Against  the  Jews, 
on  the  other  hand,  he  charged  that  they  were  zealous 
upholders  of  the  law,  but  careless  in  their  observance 
of  it,  and  that  they  prided  themselves  on  their  circum- 
cision, which  was  the  outward  sign  of  their  covenant 
with  God,  while  they  transgressed  the  law,  which 
constituted  the  inner  contents  of  the  covenant.  If 
either  Jew  or  Gentile,  therefore,  were  to  be  made 
righteous,  it  must  be  by  some  other  principle  of  right- 
eousness. But  not  content  with  these  specifications, 
he  shows  the  impossibility  of  legal  righteousness 
conclusively,  on  his  premises,  by  his  citation  of  the 
statement,  that  every  one  is  accursed  who  does  not 
continue  in  all  the  things  written  in  the  law  to  do 
them.  That  is,  the  law  requires  the  impossibility  of 
a  perfect  obedience.* 
The  apostle  not  only  shows  the  fact  of  a  universal  sin, 

1  Rom.  1 :  18-32  ;  2  :  14-16.  >  Gal.  3  :  10. 


eousness. 


SIN  AND  THE  LAW 


63 


The  effect  of 
law  on  sin. 


he  rationalises  it.^  It  is  not  by  any  mere  chance  that  Sin  as  a 
men  all  go  astray.  Sin  is  to  him  not  only  the  individual  P""^'*?^® 
act,  it  is  a  principle  of  evil,  which  once  introduced 
into  the  world,  all,  Jew  and  Gentile  alike,  share.  He 
traces  the  sin  of  men  back  to  Adam,  whose  individual  act 
of  sin  became  a  race  sin  which  was  transmitted  to  all 
his  descendants.*  But  they  were  not  held  accountable 
for  this ;  it  was  only  as  the  race  sin  was  turned  into 
individual  transgression  that  men  were  condemned.' 
And  here  was  where  the  law  came  in ;  it  was  added  for 
the  sake  of  transgressions,  to  produce  them,  or  as  it 
says  in  another  place,  to  turn  the  original  single  sin 
into  the  multiplied  sins  of  the  individual.  And  it  is 
right  here,  in  this  most  sinister  judgment  of  law,  that 
Paul  selects  his  example  from  the  most  spiritual  part 
of  the  law.  If  it  is  the  law  against  coveting,*  which 
is  identified  with  a  law  against  evil  desires  in  general, 
against  which  he  brings  this  charge,  it  must  be  the 
very  principle  of  law  itself,  as  he  understood  it,  and 
not  any  code,  nor  any  part  of  the  representative  code, 
that  he  declares  to  be  abolished.  The  law  against 
these  desires  brought  into  activity  the  principle  of  sin, 
and  slew  him.  This  was  not  because  of  any  defect  in 
the  law  itself,  but  because  of  the  principle  of  evil  that 
had  become  the  inheritance  of  the  race.  The  law 
would  have  operated  in  the  same  way  on  an  inherited 

1  On  Paul's  view  of  sin,  see  Pfleiderer,  Paulinism,  35-47 ; 
Bruce,  St.  PauVs  Conception  of  Christianity,  125-146  ;  Stevens, 
Pauline  Theology,  123-159 ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  I, 
315-350;  Beyschlag,  Neio  Testament  Theology,  II,  49-63; 
Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  37-53 ;  Cone, 
Paul,  the  Man,  the  Missionary,  and  the  Teacher,  218-250 ; 
M^n^goz,  Le  Peche  et  la  Bedemption  d^apres  St.  Paul,  11-123  ; 
Werule,  Der  Christ  und  die  Sunde  bei  Paulus. 

2  Rom.  5  :  12-21. 
8  Rom.  4:15;  5:13. 
*  Rom.  7  :  7.    Compare  Gal.  6  :  19. 


64  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

principle  of  righteousness,  turning  the  race  righteous- 
ness into  the  individual  acts  of  righteousness.^ 
The  flesh.  But  it  was  not  only  this  fact  of  race  sin  that  accounted 

for  its  universality ;  the  apostle  located  sin  in  man, 
pointing  out  the  weak  spot  in  him,  which  was  not  evil, 
but  vulnerable.  The  idea  that  the  flesh  ^  was  itself 
evil,  the  principle  of  evil  in  the  man,  owing  to  the  evil 
inherent  in  matter,  would  be  impossible  to  the  apostle, 
who,  as  a  Palestinian  Jew,  had  none  of  the  Greek 
repugnance  to  the  flesh,  and  himself  revolted  against 
any  attempt  to  philosophise  religion.^  A  good  test  of 
this  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  apostle  held  strongly 
to  the  Pharisaic  doctrine  of  a  bodily  resurrection,  not  of 
a  spiritual  immortality.*  The  latter  is  the  doctrine  of 
the  Alexandrians,  who  depreciated  the  flesh  because 
of  its  materiality.  No,  the  flesh  was  to  Paul  the  seat 
of  the  appetites  and  passions,  the  residence  of  the 
psyche  and  not  of  the  pneuma,  of  the  lower  and  not 
of  the  higher  spiritual  part  of  the  man,  and  as 
such  was  vulnerable  and  weak.  It  was  the  flesh 
upon  which  sin,  as  something  almost  personal,  seized 

^  Rom.  5:20,  which  should  be  rendered,  "And  law  came 
in  as  a  side  issue  {not  included  in  the  original  scheme  of 
things)  in  order  that  the  transgression  might  be  multiplied." 
7  : 7-25. 

2  There  are  no  terms  in  Paul  whose  meaning  is  more  funda- 
mental than  "  flesh  "  and  "  spirit."  See  Laidlaw,  Art.  "  Flesh," 
in  Hastings'  Diet.  ;  Pfleiderer,  Paulinism,  I,  47-67,  192-215 ; 
Cone,  Paul,  the  Man,  etc.,  218-230 ;  Bruce,  St.  PauVs  Concep- 
tion of  Christianity,  263-278 ;  Beyschlag,  Neio  Testament  Theol- 
ogy, II,  27-47  ;  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  II, 
19  sq. ;  Stevens,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  338  sq. ;  Wendt,  Fleisch 
und  Geist  (for  criticism  of  this  work  see  Gunkel,  Die  Wirkungen 
der  heiligen  Geistes)  ;  Dickson,  St.  PauVs  use  of  the  terms  Flesh 
and  Spirit ;  Holsten,  ' '  Die  Bedeutung  des  Wortes  ir&p^  im 
Lehrbegriffe  des  Paulus,"  in  Zum  Evangelium  des  Paulus  und 
Petrus. 

»  1  Cor.  1 :  17-2  :  16.  *  1  Cor.  16 :  38-49. 


SIN  AND  THE  LAW  65 

and  wrought  man's  downfall.  The  victory  of  the 
spiritual  principle  was  to  be  complete  only  when  sin 
was  dispossessed  here  where  it  had  its  seat  and  strong- 
hold, a  thing  impossible,  if  matter  itself  was  evil.^  It 
is  essential  to  an  understanding  of  Paul's  position  to 
remember  that  sin  was  not  to  him  the  essential  thing 
in  human  nature.  He  identified  man  himself,  the 
ego,  the  personal  principle,  with  the  higher  part  of 
man,  which  is  not  invaded  by  sin.  Sin  is  to  him  an  Sin  not  the 
alien  thing  which  has  usurped  dominion  over  his  ^^°' 
actions,  but  against  which  the  higher  part,  the  man 
himself,  rebels.  It  is  included  in  this  view,  that  the 
flesh,  the  lower  part,  is  also  the  executive  part  of  the 
man.  In  the  concrete,  it  is  the  body,  the  members, 
the  very  instruments  of  man's  activity,  in  the  midst  of 
which  sin  has  encamped,  and  as  the  ruling  principle 
there  it  controls  his  actions.  But  it  is  powerless  to 
take  possession  of  the  ego,  to  identify  itself  with  the 
man,  which  remains  in  a  state  of  perpetual  revolt 
against  it.  The  principle  of  righteousness  in  him 
therefore  does  not  have  to  be  created,  only  discovered, 
and  freed  from  the  domain  of  the  flesh.^ 

^  Rom.  8  :  3  and  the  remarkable  argument  in  ch.  7. 
2  Rom.  7  :  14-25. 


CHAPTER  II 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH 


The  nature 
of  this  right- 
eousness. 


Man  is  made 
not  declared 
righteous. 


The  righteousness  of  faith  which  the  apostle  substi- 
tutes for  the  righteousness  of  law  is  not  the  normal 
righteousness,  which  term  can  be  applied  only  to  a 
perfect  legal  righteousness.  That  perfect  legal  right- 
eousness would  be  attainable  if  it  were  not  for  the  fact 
of  the  race  sin,  and  of  the  weakness  of  the  flesh.  But 
the  presence  of  these  makes  that  righteousness  impos- 
sible, and  another  righteousness  necessary.  But  this 
substitute  can  never  be  anything  more  than  an  inferior 
righteousness,  the  acceptance  of  which  on  the  part  of 
God  is  an  act  of  grace,  not  of  justice,  not  demanded  by 
man's  merit,  but  freely  bestowed  by  God's  favour.  And 
yet  it  is  a  real  righteousness,  not  fictitious.  This 
appears  from  the  fact  that  the  word  translated 
"justify"  in  the  English  Version  is  construed  with 
cases  and  prepositions  which  render  the  meaning 
"judge  righteous"  quite  impossible.  The  man,  for 
example,  is  said  to  be  justified  by  faith,  and  through 
faith,  whereas,  if  the  act  is  one  of  judgment,  the  act 
of  the  man,  whether  works  or  faith,  can  be  neither 
that  by  which  or  through  which  the  judicial  act  is  per- 
formed, but  only  that  on  account  of  which  it  is  done. 
And  yet  this  proper  construction  is  not  found  with  the 
verb.  But  the  man  is  made  righteous  by  and  through 
his  works,  or  faith.  This  is  the  fact  in  regard  to  the 
Pauline  use  of  the  verb  Bikmovv,  to  justify,  which  makes 
the  generally  accepted  meaning  impossible.  As  long 
as  it  was  translated  "justify,"   and  then  this  was 

66 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH  67 

explained  to  mean  "judge  righteous,"  the  lack  of 
adjustment  between  the  verb  and  its  construction  was 
not  seen.  But  when  the  assumed  meaning  is  intro- 
duced into  the  translation,  the  incongruity  becomes 
apparent.  The  cases  and  prepositions  with  which  it 
is  construed  express  agency,  not  cause,  and  the  act  of 
the  man  in  the  matter  of  judgment  is  cause,  not  agent.* 
But,  inasmuch  as  the  state  of  righteousness  into 
which  a  man  is  introduced  by  the  act  of  faith  is  differ-  The  right- 
ent  from  that  into  which  he  is  introduced  by  works,  fahifnol"* 
a  righteousness  which  is  plainly  in  some  sense  a  quasi-  fictitious, 
righteousness,  it  is  necessary  to  carry  the  argument  a 
step  further,  to  show  that  the  quasi-element  does  not 
involve  the  element  of  fictitiousness,  but  only  of 
inferiority.  To  answer  the  question  thus  raised,  we 
must  examine  the  apostle's  statements  to  find  if  faith 
is  in  his  view  a  principle  of  righteousness  really,  or 
only  by  an  act  of  grace  which  passes  over  the  real 
state  of  the  man,  and  assigns  him  a  position,  which 
really  does  not  belong  to  him.  The  following  facts 
will  show  how  Paul  regards  faith  ^ :  (1)  In  the  first  place 

1  For  further  discussion,  see  my  article  in  Am.  Jour,  of 
Theology,  1897,  pp.  149-158 ;  also,  Pfleiderer,  Paulinism,  160- 
191;  Simon,  Art.  "Justification,"  in  Hastings'  Diet.;  Bruce, 
St.  PauVs  Conception  of  Christianity,  147-164  ;  Stevens,  Paul- 
ine Theology,  259-291  ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  I,  419- 
452  ;  Beyschlag,  New  Testament  Theology,  II,  183-200 ;  Holtz- 
mann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  124  sq. ;  Cone,  Paul, 
the  Man,  the  Missionary,  and  the  Teacher,  342-369 ;  Sabatier, 
Uapotre  Paul,  318  sq. ;  Sanday  and  Ileadlam,  Romans,  28-31 ; 
Kaftan,  Das  Wesen  der  christlichen  Religion,  300  sq.  ;  Ritschl, 
llechfertigung  und  Versohnung,  Bd.  Ill,  466  sq. ;  Lipsius,  Die 
Paulinische  Rechtfertigungslehre ;  Riggenbach,  Die  Rechtferti- 
gungnlehre  des  Apostels  Paulus ;  M6n6goz,  Le  Pechc  et  la 
Redemption  d'apres  St.  Paul,  251-286. 

2  Warfield,  Art.  "Faith,"  in  Hastings'  Diet.;  Weiss,  Theology 
of  the  N.  T,  I,  437  sq. ;  Beyschlag,  Neio  Testament  Theology, 
II,    176-182 ;    Holtzmann,    Neutestamentliche    Theologie,    II, 


68  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

it  is  to  him  one  of  the  principles  of  the  new  life,  in  a 
certain  sense  the  continuous  principle  of  that  life.* 

(2)  Faith  is  commended  as  praiseworthy.''  (3)  The 
relation  of  faith  to  repentance.  This  is  a  considera- 
tion of  the  greatest  importance,  because  repentance  is 
the  act  by  which  man  passes  from  the  state  of  disfavour 
with  God,  into  that  of  favour.  The  Greek  word  which 
we  have  translated  "  repentance  "  denotes  that  inward 
change  of  the  man  from  sin  to  righteousness  which  is 
the  natural  cause  of  God's  change  of  attitude  toward 
him.  As  far  as  the  man's  past  is  concerned,  this 
involves  pardon,  but  of  the  man's  present  state  there 
can  be  nothing  but  approval,  and  these  two  necessary 
elements  are  included  in  the  general  Scriptural  state- 
ment. Now  the  apostle  does  not  use  the  word  "  repent- 
ance "  in  this  connection,  but  in  his  discourse  about 
justifying  faith,  he  does  introduce  the  act  of  repent- 
ance, though  under  another  name.  In  Gal.  2 :  16  he 
says  that  he  believed  in  Jesus  Christ,  that  he  might 
be  justified  by  faith  in  Christ,  and  not  by  works 
of  law.  And  in  verse  19,  he  goes  on  to  say  that  this 
death  to  law  was  in  order  that  he  might  live  to  God. 
Then  to  clinch  the  matter,  he  says,  verse  20,  that  it 
was  with  Christ  that  he  was  thus  crucified  to  law,  and 

121  sq.  ;  Stevens,  Pauline  Theology,  268  sq. ;  Bruce,  St.  PauVs 
Conception  of  Christianity,  226  sq. ;  Sanday  and  Headlam, 
Comm.  on  Bomans,  31  sq. ;  Lightfoot,  Galatians,  154  sq. ; 
Hatch,  Essays  in  Biblical  Greek,  83  sq. ;  Schlatter,  Der  Glaube 
im  N.  T.;  Schnedermann,  De  fidei  ratione  ethica  Paulina. 
See  further  the  note  on  p.  79  below. 

iRom.  15:13;  1  Cor.  14:22,  23;  Rom.  1:8,  12;  5:2; 
11 :  20  ;  12  :  3,  6  ;  14  :  1  ;  1  Cor.  2:5;  12  :  9  ;  13 :  2,  13  ;  2  Cor. 
1  :  24  ;  4  :  13  ;  5  :  7  ;  8  :  7  ;  10  :  15  ;  13  :  5  ;  Gal.  2  :  20  ;  3:2,  5  ; 
5:5,  6,  22  ;  Phil.  1  :  25  ;  2  :  17.  The  statement  among  these 
in  which  this  position  of  faith  is  directly  affirmed,  and  not 
implied  merely,  is  1  Cor.  13  :  13. 

a  Rom.  1 : 8,  12 ;  4  :  19,  20  ;  2  Cor.  8:7;  10  :  16 ;  PhU.  1 :  26. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH  69 

that  he  lives  no  longer  as  the  ego,  but  Christ  lives  in 
him,  which  explains  how  it  is  that  his  death  to  law 
became  a  life  to  God.  But  further,  to  connect  this 
directly  with  the  act  of  faith,  he  declares  that  the 
principle  of  this  new  life  is  his  faith  in  the  Son  of 
God.  Here  is  evidently  the  change  from  sin  to  right- 
eousness which  is  elsewhere  called  repentance,  and  the 
principle  by  which  the  change  is  effected  is  faith. 
(4)  In  Kom.  8 : 1-11,  the  apostle  concludes  what  he  has 
been  saying  about  the  deliverance  through  Christ  with 
the  statement  that  there  is  therefore  no  condemnation 
to  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus.  This  "therefore" 
connects  the  statement  with  the  preceding  passage 
in  which  he  describes  his  bondage  to  sin  and  his  deliv-  of  sin. 
erance  from  it.  He  is  not  under  condemnation,  because 
he  is  no  longer  under  sin.  That  is  the  force  of  the 
"therefore."  It  establishes  the  man's  acquittal  in 
his  deliverance  from  sin.  But  then  he  goes  on  to  con- 
firm this  by  a  rehearsal  of  this  deliverance.  He  is  set 
free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death  by  a  new  law  set 
up  in  him  by  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus.  God 
by  the  gift  of  his  Son  accomplished  the  dispossession 
of  sin  within  the  flesh  where  it  had  its  seat,  in  order 
that  the  command  of  the  law  might  be  fulfilled  in  them 
who  walk  not  according  to  flesh,  but  according  to 
Spirit ;  because  those  in  the  flesh  cannot  please  God, 
only  those  in  the  Spirit.  That  is,  the  reason  of  the 
man's  reception  into  the  favour  of  God,  is  not  what 
Christ  has  done  for  him  ab  extra,  but  what  he  has  done 
within  him  in  restoring  him  to  a  new  life  of  righteous- 
ness. Now  this  passage  it  is  simply  impossible  to 
adjust  to  what  has  preceded,  if  that  has  for  its  subject 
justification,  not  as  an  act  of  rectification  morally,  but 
as  an  act  of  judgment.  For  that  would  make  two 
judgments,  one  being  God's  act  in  the  free  acquittal 
of  men  who  believe  in  Christ  as  an  expiatory  sacrifice ; 


70 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


and  the  other  being  this  judgment,  which  accepts 
believers  because  their  faith  leads  up  to  a  life  accept- 
able to  God.  Whereas  if  the  preceding  subject  has 
been  justification  considered  as  a  moral  rectification, 
this  follows  naturally  as  a  statement  of  the  acceptance 
of  such  morally  rectified  persons  into  the  favour  of 
God.  In  the  one  case,  we  have  two  incongruous  judg- 
ments ;  in  the  other,  a  statement  first  of  God's  act  in 
providing  for  men  a  new  righteousness  through  faith 
in  Christ,  and  secondly  of  his  acceptance  of  those 
who  have  "this  new  righteousness  into  his  favour. 

(6)  The  passage,  Gal.  5 : 4-6,  in  speaking  of  this 
very  matter  of  justifying  faith,  defines  it  as  a  faith 
which  works  through  love  and  purifies  the  heart.  This 
is  not  merely  a  chance  statement  about  faith,  but  is 
given  as  the  reason  why  it  avails  with  God,  instead  of 
circumcision.  Qicod  erat  demonstrandum.  We  set  out 
to  ask  whether  Paul  regards  faith  as  a  real  principle 
of  righteousness,  or  only  the  non-moral  condition  of 
God's  acceptance  of  a  man  who  is  not  righteous,  but  a 
sinner.  But  if  faith  works  through  love,  which  is  the 
sum  of  all  the  virtues,  and  purifies  the  heart,  then  it 
is  obviously  a  real  principle  of  righteousness,  and  not 
the  condition  of  God's  acceptance  of  a  man  who  is  not 
made  righteous  by  it. 

(6)  Faith  itself  is  the  cause  of  justification  and  not 
the  righteousness  of  Christ,  or  his  expiatory  sacrifice. 
This  is  a  very  important  element  in  the  discussion, 
because  it  is  at  the  very  root  of  the  ordinary  doctrine 
of  justification,  that  it  is  not  procured  by  anything  in 
the  man  himself,  but  is  the  result  of  the  expiatory  death 
of  our  Lord,  which  purchases  for  man  release  from  the 
penalty  on  the  ground  of  Christ's  own  bearing  of  that 
penalty.  It  is  this  doctrine  of  atonement  which  in- 
cludes within  itself  as  its  human  condition  the  faith 
which  really  does  nothing  more  than  bring  the  indi- 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH  71 

vidual  man  into  connection  with  the  finished  work  of 
Christ.  It  is  decisive  against  this  view  that  Paul  cites 
the  faith  of  Abraham  as  the  palmary  case  of  justify- 
ing faith.  The  faith  in  this  case  is  simply  a  faith  in 
God  in  the  matter  of  Abraham's  posterity,  a  faith  the 
merit  of  which  was  enhanced  by  the  obstacles  which 
it  overcame  in  the  matter  of  Sarah's  over  age,  and  of 
the  command  given  him  to  sacrifice  Isaac.  Evidently 
in  this  case  it  was  the  faith  itself  that  justified,  and 
evidently  also  because  of  the  principle  of  righteousness 
contained  in  it. 

It  is  here  that  one  obtains  the  proper  point  of  view 
for  examining  Paul's  doctrine  of  election.  It  has  been 
given  to  Paul  to  be  more  variously  misunderstood  than 
any  other  man  except  our  Lord  himself,  but  nowhere 
more  grievously  than  on  this  subject.  By  his  doctrine 
of  election  is  meant  Paul's  exposition  of  the  fact  that 
his  Gospel,  as  he  calls  it,  involves  the  exclusion  of  the 
Jews  from  the  kingdom,  and  the  substitution  of  the 
Gentiles,  and  this  in  its  turn  means  apparently 
the  defeat  of  the  divine  purpose  in  making  the  Jews 
his  chosen  people.  What  has  been  supposed  to  be  the 
apostle's  ultimate  thought  about  this  is  really  only  a 
preliminary  step,  and  to  treat  it  as  ultimate  is  to  throw 
the  whole  discussion  out  of  relation,  and  leave  the 
apostle  with  his  main  question  unanswered.  The 
answer  has  been  supposed  to  be  that  God's  choice  is 
absolute,  for  which  he  is  required  to  give  no  reason. 
But  while  this  would  answer  the  question  why  God 
chose  any  individual  or  nation,  —  namely,  that  there  is 
no  particular  reason,  and  does  not  need  to  be  any,  —  it 
would  not  in  any  way  meet  the  question,  how  he  could 
set  aside  a  definite  promise,  expressly  made  irrevoca- 
ble in  the  first  place.  No,  the  answer  is,  that  the 
ground  of  God's  choice  is  the  faith  which  Israel  inher- 
ited from  Abraham,  but  which  the  nation  has  by  its 


72 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  ground  own  act  set  aside,  and  substituted  for  it  the  self-right- 
choice  ot  ®o^s  ground  of  legalism,  while  the  Gentile  on  the  other 
Jew  or  hand  has  succeeded  to  Israel's  position  and  privilege 

of  faith,  and  that  the  relations  of  the  two  are  thus  by 
the  act  of  each  reversed.  And  yet  this  does  not  give 
the  Gentiles  an  independent  claim  on  God  nor  a  per- 
manent advantage  over  the  Jew.  The  stock  of  God's 
people  is  still  the  Jews,  and  the  Gentiles  have  been 
grafted  into  that  stock.  That  is,  they  have  inherited 
the  Jewish  Scriptures  and  the  Jewish  Messiah.  And 
God's  purpose  in  regard  to  Israel  remains  unchanged. 
When  once  the  gathering  of  the  Gentiles  is  complete, 
God  means  to  stir  up  the  Jews  to  jealousy,  and  ulti- 
mately to  bring  in  all  Israel.  This  is  the  answer,  and 
the  other,  the  absoluteness  of  election,  is  only  a 
preliminary  consideration,  intended  to  rebuke  the 
presumption  with  which  ignorant  men  bring  charges 
against  God. 

Bid   why  is  faith   the  principle  of  nghteousness? 

The  answer  to  this  question  is  obvious  to  any  one  who 

is  conversant  with  the  apostle's  thought.     At  least, 

the  most  obvious  answer  is  that  faith  justifies  because 

it  connects  the  man  with  Christ.    Our  Lord  is  himself 

ir  the  vital  principle  of  the  new  life,  and  faith  is  what 

\  J^  brings  the  source  and  recipient  of  the  life  together, 

'lii^^  \\      as  roots  bring  plant  and  soil  together.^    And  yet,  as 

A/v   we  have  seen,  one  will  have  to  seek  further  than  this 

to  discover  Paul's  whole  idea,  because  he  ascribes 

Ofiie  same  power  to  the  faith  of  Abraham.    Faith  is 

?«     evidently  in  his  view  a  principle  of   righteousness 

.because  it  has  the  power  which  the  law  has  not,  to 

implant  life.     Sin  has  destroyed  the  moral  life  of  man 

1  Among  the  multitude  of  passages  where  St.  Paul  aflBrms 
this  mystic  relation  of  Christ  to  the  believer,  see  especially 
Gal.  2 :  19,  20.  See  also  Sanday  and  Headlam,  Bomans, 
162-166. 


Why  is  faith 
the  principle 
of  righteous- 
ness? 


basis  of 
faith. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH  73 

and  something  is  needed  to  restore  it.  This  power  is 
lodged  in  faith  because  it  establishes  spiritual  con- 
nection with  God,  it  brings  men  into  fellowship  with 
God,  either  immediately,  as  in  the  case  of  Abraham, 
or  through  Christ.  And  Christ  becomes  the  ground  Christ  as  the 
and  basis  of  faith  not  only  through  his  death,  but 
also  through  his  resurrection.^  Anything  in  either 
God  or  Christ  which  is  restoring  and  life-giving  in 
its  effect,  may  become  the  object  of  faith  and  the 
restorer  of  life.  But  as  a  general  thing,  just  as 
it  is  Christ  who  is  the  usual  object  of  faith,  so  it 
is  the  death  of  Christ,  rather  than  the  other  aspects 
of  his  life.  And  we  have  here,  therefore,  the  first 
attempt  to  rationalise  the  death  of  our  Lord;  not 
only  to  remove  the  difficulties  attending  it,  but  to  show 
its  place  in  the  divine  scheme  of  redemption.  The 
passage  in  which  this  is  set  forth  most  fully  is  Eom. 
3:21-31.  It  is  a  passage  which  describes  the  new 
righteousness,  and  it  is  different  from  those  passages 
which  we  have  been  examining,  in  which  justification 
is  by  the  act  of  the  man  himself,  since  God  is  intro- 
duced here  as  the  justifier.  But  not  even  here  does 
the  word  denote  the  judicial  act  directly,  though  it  is 
involved  in  it.  The  word  generally  means  to  make 
righteous,  and  this  may  be  either  by  the  man's 
own  act,  in  which  case  it  denotes  the  quality  or  act 
which  God  recognises  as  constituting  his  righteous- 
ness, or  it  may  be  by  the  act  of  God,  in  which  case  it 
denotes  the  reinstatement  of  the  man  in  the  position  of 
righteousness ;  not  the  judicial  act  itself,  but  the  effect 
of  that  in  this  reinstatement.  The  gratuitousness  which 
is  said  to  belong  to  the  divine  act  here,  shows  that  it 
is  this  reinstatement  which  is  meant,  since  it  is  the 
incipient  righteousness  of  faith  which  God  accepts, 

1  Rom.  4  :  24  ;  10  :  9. 


74  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

not  the  accomplished  righteousness  of  works.  This 
reinstatement  of  man  in  the  status  of  righteousness  is 
said  to  be  through  the  redemption  in  Christ  Jesus, 
and  this  term  again  applies  more  naturally  to  an  effect 
of  the  work  of  Christ  in  procuring  the  recognition  of 
this  righteousness,  rather  than  in  producing  the  right- 
eousness. Now  what  follows  in  Rom.  3 :  25,  is  evi- 
dently to  show  in  what  this  redemption  consisted.  It 
says  that  God  set  Jesus  forth  as  a  propitiatory  sacrifice 
in  his  blood  (death),  through  faith.  According  to  this, 
the  sacrifice  is  the  death  of  our  Lord,  which  becomes 
the  offering  of  the  individual  man  through  his  faith, 
and  propitiates  God,  as  the  sin  offerings  of  the  law 
propitiated  him,  wiping  out  guilt  by  a  sacrifice,  which 
in  some  sense  takes  the  place  of  the  man's  own  suf- 
fering.^ The  death  of  our  Lord  becomes  to  Paul 
expiatory  in  this  sense,  that  it  is  a  general  offering 
The  death  of  appropriated  by  the  individual  man  in  the  act  of  faith, 
and  representing  the  cost  of  his  own  redemption,  the 
suffering  exacted  somewhere  of  some  one  as  an  offset 
to  his  own  freedom  from  penalty.  Furthermore,  it  is 
for  the  exhibition  of  the  divine  righteousness,  rendered 
necessary  by  the  double  fact  that  God  passed  over  in 
his  forbearance  the  previous  sins  of  men,  and  that  he 
now  reinstates  in  the  position  of  righteousness  those 
who  only  believe  in  Jesus.  There  is  evidently  a  con- 
nection in  the  apostle's  thought  between  this  righteous- 

1  On  the  Pauline  position  as  regards  the  death  of  Jesus,  see 
Stevens,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  403-416  ;  Cone,  Paul,  the  Man, 
the  Missionary,  and  the  Teacher,  261-279  ;  Weiss,  Theology  of 
the  N.  T.,  I,  419  sq.;  Beyschlag,  New  Testament  Theology,  II, 
133-103  ;  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  97-121 ; 
Bovon,  Theologie  du  N.  T.,  II,  161  sq.;  Pfleiderer,  Pauliiiism, 
1,91-117  ;  Bruce,  St.  PauVs  Conception  of  Christianity,  321  sq., 
400  sq. ;  Murray,  Art.  "Atonement,"  Hastings'  Did.;  Som- 
merville,  St.  PauVs  Conception  of  Christ,  73  sq. ;  Cave,  The 
Scriptural  Doctrine  of  Sacrifice  and  Atonement,  283  sq.,  294  sq. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH 


75 


ness  of  God,  and  the  new  righteousness  provided  by 
him  for  men.  It  means  that  in  the  setting  up  of  this 
new  righteousness,  it  must  be  not  simply  the  divine 
grace  that  shall  be  shown,  but  preeminently  the  divine 
righteousness.  Because  if  the  effect  of  righteousness 
is  to  be  produced  in  men,  it  must  be  the  quality  of 
righteousness  in  God  that  is  emphasised.  If  in  the 
very  process,  he  seems  to  let  down  his  righteousness 
somewhere,  if  he  passes  over  sins,  or  counts  an  infe- 
rior righteousness  as  giving  men  title  to  be  considered 
righteous,  and  does  nothing  to  make  up  for  this,  he 
vitiates  the  process  in  its  most  vital  part.  But  he  does 
make  up  for  this ;  he  makes  up  for  it  in  the  very  way 
provided  in  the  law ;  he  sets  forth  a  propitiatory 
sacrifice,  which  represents,  as  the  sacrifices  all  do,  that 
something  else  beyond  the  restoration  of  the  man -by 
which  God  is  reconciled.  It  represents  that  side  of 
the  divine  righteousness  by  which  God,  in  some  form 
or  other,  connects  sin  and  suffering  together,  and 
himself  provides  something  which  shall  emphasise 
this  note  in  him,  in  the  redemption  of  men.  That  is, 
to  go  back  to  the  contrast  which  helped  us  understand 
the  historical  connections  of  our  Lord's  teaching,  in 
the  contest  between  priest  and  prophet,  Paul  is  not  so 
singly  on  the  side  of  the  prophets  as  our  Lord  himself  is. 
He  makes  this  concession  to  priestism.  The  remedy 
for  this  is  in  the  definition  of  penalty  as  confined 
absolutely  to  the  sphere  of  the  act  which  it  punishes. 
Sin  has  for  its  penalty  the  destruction  of  the  man's 
moral  nature,  and  the  only  way  out  of  this  is  to  stop 
sinning ;  there  is  no  substitution  possible  here ;  no  one 
can  suffer  for  the  man  himself,  and  when  the  sin  itself 
stops,  the  consequence  stops.  There  is  nothing  here 
to  render  that  something  beyond,  by  which  God  is 
appeased,  necessary,  or  even  possible.  There  is  noth- 
ing, and  nothing  is  needed. 


The  priestly 
element  in 
Paul's 
thought. 


76  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

On  the  other  hand,  the  apostle's  doctrine  of  the 
penalty  of  sin  is  that  it  consists  in  physical  death,  and 
it  is  the  very  item  in  this  which  the  Greeks,  together 
with  some  of  their  modern  followers,  regarded  with 
joy,  which  he  dreads.  To  him  as  a  Pharisee,  the 
separation  of  soul  and  body  was  to  leave  the  soul  a 
naked  and  shivering  thing,  deprived  of  its  natural 
home.  2  Cor.  5 : 1-8  should  be  translated :  "  For  we 
know  that  if  our  earthly  habitation  of  the  tent  be 
destroyed,  we  have  a  building  from  God,  a  house  not 
made  with  hands,  eternal  in  the  heavens.  For  in  this 
(dwelling)  we  groan,  longing  to  put  on  over  it  our 
dwelling  from  heaven,  since  also  having  put  it  on,  we 
shall  not  be  found  naked.  For  even  we  who  are  in 
the  tent  groan,  being  burdened  because  we  do  not 
wish  to  be  unclothed,  but  overclothed,  in  order  that 
immortality  may  be  swallowed  up  in  life.  And  he  who 
wrought  us  for  this  very  thing  is  God,  who  also  gave 
us  the  pledge  of  the  spirit.  Taking  courage  therefore 
always,  and  knowing  that  when  we  are  present  in  the 
body  we  are  absent  from  the  Lord ;  for  we  walk  by 
faith  not  by  sight ;  but  we  take  courage  and  are  well 
pleased  to  be  in  exile  from  the  body  and  to  be  at  home 
with  the  Lord."  The  situation  is  this :  Paul,  with  all 
his  generation,  is  looking  forward  to  the  speedy  com- 
ing of  the  Lord,  and  with  it  to  the  resurrection.  And 
he  groans  while  he  is  here  at  the  thought  that  he  may 
not  live  to  see  that  time,  and  may  have  therefore  to 
pass  into  the  bodiless,  naked  state  of  the  unrisen  dead. 
Whereas,  what  he  eagerly  desires  is  to  put  on  the 
resurrection  body  over  the  present  body,  that  the  mor- 
tal body  may  be  swallowed  (merged)  in  the  life  of  the 
resurrection  body,  without  having  to  pass  through  the 
nakedness  of  the  intermediate  state.  The  only  thing 
that  gives  him  any  encouragement  is  that  even  that 
bodiless  state  introduces  him  into  the  presence  of  the 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH  77 

Lord,  which  is  preferable  to  the  present  condition 
with  the  body,  but  without  the  Lord,  and  so  he  takes 
courage  even  in  facing  that  nakedness  and  chill  of  the 
disembodied  state.  The  work  of  the  Lord,  therefore, 
consists  in  this,  so  far  as  the  final  redemption  of  man 
is  concerned,  that  he  passes  through  this  state  of  The  final  re- 
death  which  sin  has  entailed  upon  man,  and  thereby  chidesThe"^' 
expiates  the  sin  which  he  himself  does  not  share,  but  body, 
the  penalty  for  which  he  suffers,  and  then  by  his  own 
resurrection  achieves  for  man  the  deliverance  from 
death,  and  the  entrance  with  him  into  the  resurrection 
state.  The  thought  which  underlies  the  whole  doc- 
trine is  that  Christ  represents  man,  so  that  man  dies 
with  him,  shares  his  death,  instead  of  having  to  un- 
dergo the  penalty  in  his  own  person,  and  then  rises 
with  him,  a  resurrection  which  is  effected  virtually  in 
the  resurrection  of  Christ,  and  finally  actually  in  the 
resurrection  of  the  man  himself.  We  shall  see  later 
the  other  implications  of  this  doctrine.  For  the  pres- 
ent we  have  introduced  it  in  order  to  show  the  place 
of  our  Lord's  death,  its  effect  in  expiating  the  sin 
of  men.  And  faith  is  the  principle  of  righteousness 
because  it  appropriates  to  itself,  makes  its  own,  the 
sacrifice  of  Jesus  by  which  he  expiates  the  sin  of 
men,  and  so  vindicates  the  righteousness  of  God. 
This  expiation  of  sin  was  to  an  orthodox  Jew  a  part 
of  the  man's  restoration  to  the  status  of  righteousness, 
and  Paul  was  in  this  respect  an  orthodox  Jew.  He 
represented  in  his  doctrine  both  priestism  and  prophet- 
ism,  a  mixture  which  we  do  not  find  in  the  Synoptics. 
But  we  shall  grievously  misunderstand  the  apostle, 
if  we  think  of  him  as  fixing  his  attention  upon  this 
aspect  of  the  death  of  Christ,  to  the  exclusion  of  its 
more  spiritual  effect  in  restoring  man  to  inward  sym- 
pathy with  God,  as  well  as  outward  peace.  In  Rom.  6, 
he  shows  that  through  the  death  of  our  Lord  we  who 


78 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


believe  die  to  sin,  and  rise  to  newness  of  life.  And 
lest  we  should  think  that  he  is  talking  here  of  another 
part  of  the  subject,  and  not  of  tbis  special  theme  of 
justification,  be  says  (vs.  7),  that  be  who  so  died  has 
been  justified  from  sin.  In  Gal.  5 :  6,  speaking  of  the 
faitb  tbat  justifies,  be  says  that  in  Christ  Jesus  neither 
circumcision  avails  anytbing,  nor  uncircumcision,  but 
faitb  working  through  love.  But  love  is  understood 
by  the  apostle  to  be  the  principle  of  righteousness, 
the  summing  up  of  the  law,  and  if  faitb  bas  tbat  for 
its  effect,  it  is  evident  tbat  it  not  only  brings  about 
tbe  acceptance  of  the  man  as  rigbteous,  but  actually 
makes  him  rigbteous  (cf.  vs.  14).  In  Gal.  1:4,  be 
speaks  of  Christ  as  giving  himself  for  our  sins,  that 
be  migbt  deliver  us  from  tbe  present  evil  age.  And 
in  Gal.  2 :  19,  20,  be  continues  bis  discourse  on  justifi- 
cation by  faitb  instead  of  works,  in  tbe  statement  tbat 
it  was  tbrougb  law  tbat  be  died  to  law,  tbat  be  was 
crucified  with  Cbrist,  and  be  lives  no  longer  in  propria 
persona,  but  Christ  lives  in  bim ;  and  tbe  life  tbat  be 
now  lives  in  tbe  flesh  be  lives  in  tbe  faitb  of  tbe  Son 
of  God,  wbo  loved  bim  and  gave  bimself  for  bim. 
Here  be  evidently  thinks  of  faitb  as  uniting  bim  to 
Cbrist  not  for  tbe  purposes  of  an  outward  justification, 
but  of  an  inward  renewal,  which  is  the  ground  of  the 
outward  acceptance  witb  God.  Tbe  point  of  all  tbese 
quotations  is  tbat  tbey  speak  of  this  inward  renewal 
as  constituting  tbe  rigbteousness  of  faitb,  and  not  as 
tbe  basis  of  something  whicb  follows  tbat,  which 
tbeologians  have  called  sanctification.  They  say  tbat 
to  put  this  inward  renewal  at  the  beginning  of  tbe 
Christian  life  is  to  confound  justification  and  sancti- 
fication ;  and  tbat  it  is  tbe  former,  tbe  outward  accept- 
ance witb  God,  whicb  comes  first,  while  tbe  inward 
renewal  follows  it.  But  it  is  Paul  bimself  wbo  thus 
identifies  tbe  inward  renewal  witb  tbe  rigbteousness 


THE  BIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  FAITH  79 

of  faith.  And  if  anything,  his  emphasis  is  on  the 
spiritual  eifect  of  the  death  of  our  Lord,  rather  than  its 
expiatory  effect.  But  both  belong  to  Paul's  view  of  the 
righteousness  of  faith.  He  thinks  of  the  believer  as 
made  righteous  by  his  faith ;  that  is  the  first  point. 
But  then  his  faith  appropriates  also  to  itself  the  sacrifice 
of  Christ,  and  secures  for  the  man  its  expiatory  effect,  so 
that  he  is  not  only  made  righteous  by  it,  but  also 
inducted  into  the  status  of  righteousness  by  the  divine 
act.  To  miss  either  one  of  these  is  to  miss  an  essential 
part  of  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  justification.^ 

1  It  should  be  said  in  defence  of  the  forensic  view  of  the  verb 
SiKaiovv,  that,  owing  to  Luther's  building  his  whole  structure  on 
this  interpretation,  it  is  the  common  Protestant  view.  But  a 
greater  consideration  is  the  agreement  of  the  lexicographers  that 
this  is  the  invariable  use  in  the  LXX  and  in  classic  Greek.  If 
this  statement  were  true,  it  would  afford  a  presumption  against 
which  any  special  view  of  St.  Paul's  use  would  find  it  difficult 
to  make  headway.  But  this  view  of  the  general  use  of  the 
word  needs  restatement  just  as  much  as  the  forensic  view  of  the 
Biblical  use.  E.g.,  there  is  at  least  one  example  in  the  LXX  of 
St.  Paul's  statement  that  a  man  is  justified  by  his  own  act. 
Our  use  of  the  word  "justify"  to  denote  the  defence  of  an 
action  or  a  person  does  not  come  strictly  under  the  head  of  "  ac- 
counting righteous."  Among  modem  writers  who  have  made 
departures  more  or  less  wide  from  the  forensic  view,  are  Light- 
foot,  Epistles  of  Paul,  270 ;  Biblical  Essays,  230 ;  Westcott,  Bruce, 
Parrar,  George  Matheson,  Fairbairn,  Julius  Hare,  Maurice,  Lias 
{Nicene  Creed),  McLeod  Campbell,  the  Lux  Mundi  School ; 
among  Americans,  Kedney,  Du  Bose,  and  Harris.  The  difficulty 
is  that  many  of  these  men  are  writing  in  regard  to  the  true  doc- 
trine of  justification  by  faith,  whereas  we  are  treating  St.  Paul's 
doctrine.  E.g.,  Dr.  Harris  {God,  Creator  and  Lord  of  All,  II, 
332)  says:  "The  objection  to  the  doctrine  of  justification  by 
faith  insists  that  justification  must  be  conditioned,  not  on  faith, 
but  on  right  character.  But  justification  by  faith  is  itself  the 
doctrine  of  a  justification  conditioned  on  right  character,  be- 
cause faith  in  God  is  the  only  possible  beginning  of  right  char- 
acter either  in  men  or  angels."    This  is  true  in  itself,  but  St. 


80  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Paul's  teaching  is  that  the  righteousness  of  faith  is  an  inferior 
righteousness  accepted  by  God  only  through  grace.  Among 
Germans  who  recognize  the  inner  moral  side  of  justification  may 
be  mentioned  Schleiermacher,  Lipsius  (Z>je  Paulinische  Recht- 
fertigungslehre),  Baur,  Reuss,  Beyschlag,  and  Martensen. 
These  writers  are  strongly  supported  by  the  group  of  Neo- 
Hegelian  writers  who  work  on  the  lines  of  Kant's  maxim,  that 
the  one  truly  good  thing  is  a  good  will,  such  as  Professor  lloyce, 
the  two  Cairds,  Bradley  (Ethical  Studies),  Green  (Justification 
by  Faith,  and  Lay  Sermon  on  "  Faith  ").  Ethical  writers,  such 
9A  Smythe,  follow  Kant  in  holding  the  "germinal  theory"  of 
justification,  "the  will  for  the  deed,"  or  the  Hegelian  theory. 
Examples  of  the  latter  are  James  (The  Will  to  Believe),  James 
Seth  (Ethical  Principles),  and  Paulsen  (Ethics).  But  what- 
ever these  men  say  in  regard  to  justification  by  faith  is  subject 
to  the  criticism  mentioned  above  that  they  are  discussing  the 
general  doctrine,  not  the  Pauline  doctrine,  and  that  therefore 
what  they  have  to  say  has  little  bearing  on  the  Pauline  use  of 
the  verb  8tKaiodv.  In  addition  to  this  statement  of  modifica- 
tions of  the  Protestant  view  of  justification  it  is  scarcely  neces- 
sary to  mention  that  the  Roman  Catholics  since  the  Reformation 
have  held  the  realistic  view  of  the  doctrine.  But  it  is  a  matter 
of  importance  that  before  the  Reformation,  Church  writers  were 
divided  in  their  opinion,  the  realistic  view  being  held  by  the 
schoolmen,  such  as  Lombard  and  Thomas  and  even  by  Augus- 
tine. 


CHAPTER   III 

THE  HOLY  SPIRIT  IN  THE  WORK  OF  REDEMPTION 

With  the  gift  to  men  of  this  new  righteousness,  the  The  Spirit  in 
work  of  redemption  is  only  begun,  however.  Its  com-  redempdon' 
pletion  is  looked  upon  by  the  apostle  as  practically 
assured,  but  it  has  to  wait  for  the  event  of  our  Lord's 
reappearance  for  its  actual  accomplishment.  Mean- 
time, there  is  given  to  men  a  pledge  of  this  final  sal- 
vation in  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  part  of  the 
work  which  has  been  practically  accomplished  is  the 
redemption  of  the  spirit,  that  remaining  to  be  done  is 
the  redemption  of  the  body.  And  it  is  in  the  redemp- 
tion of  the  spirit  that  the  Holy  Spirit  plays  its  part. 
This  is  set  forth  best  in  Eom.  8.  It  appears  there  that  he 
is  the  creator  or  inspirer  of  the  new  life,  that  by  which 
sin  is  dispossessed  in  the  man,  and  the  righteousness 
of  the  law,  impossible  under  the  law  itself,  is  real- 
ised. But  now,  in  this  discourse  there  is  a  continual 
interchange  of  offices  between  the  Spirit  and  Christ 
himself.  It  is  the  law  of  the  Spirit  which  sets  him 
free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death,  but  it  is  by  our 
Lord's  taking  on  himself  our  flesh,  the  likeness  of  the 
flesh  of  sin,  that  sin  is  dispossessed,  and  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  law  is  realised  (vss.  2,  3).  Men  are  in  the 
Spirit,  if  indeed  the  Spirit  of  God  d^vells  in  them. 
But  in  the  next  clause,  the  Spirit  of  God  becomes  the  The  Spirit  of 
Spirit  of  Christ,  and  in  the  next  clause,  Christ  himself  ^^'■^'*^- 
is  substituted  (vss.  9,  JO).  In  2  Cor.  3:17,  the  two 
are  expressly  identified,  the  statement  being  that  the 
G  81 


82  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Lord  is  the  Spirit,  and  where  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
is,  there  is  liberty.  The  explanation  of  this  is  the 
peculiar  doctrine  of  Paul  in  regard  to  the  relations  of 
the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  to  each  other,  and  of  both 
to  the  Father.  God  himself  dwells  apart  in  some 
sense,  and  it  is  the  office  of  the  Son  and  the  Spirit  to 
bring  him  near.  This  approach  of  God  to  men  is  in 
two  ways,  revelation  and  indwelling.  Or  rather,  both 
are  revelations,  the  one  inward,  and  the  other  objec- 
tive. The  objective  revelation,  made  to  the  senses,  an 
object  lesson  so  to  speak,  is  through  the  Son.  And  it 
is  this  which  constitutes  the  break  in  the  process  of 
revelation,  the  new  thing  by  which  the  comparative 
vagueness  and  slowness  of  the  ordinary  method  is  set 
aside  for  the  time,  and  there  is  substituted  the  definite- 
ness  and  immediateness  of  a  human  life  embodying 
everything  that  men  need  to  know  about  God.  The 
substitution  for  this  of  the  Spirit  is  not  the  setting  up 
of  a  new  principle  of  revelation,  but  the  return  to  the 
old  and  normal  principle,  the  subjective  revelation 
within  the  spirit  of  man,  of  which  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
the  agent.  But  this  inward  revelation  is  no  longer 
what  it  has  been,  because  meantime  there  has  been  the 
outward  revelation  which  changes  the  whole  aspect  of 
things.  It  is  now  no  longer  the  imperfectly  revealed 
God  who  is  slowly  brought  within  the  compass  of 
human  thought  by  the  touch  of  the  Divine  Spirit ;  it  is 
the  God  revealed  in  Christ.  In  the  incarnation  we 
have  God  translated  into  the  terms  of  human  life ;  in 
the  Spirit  after  the  incarnation,  we  have  the  Son  trans- 
lated into  the  terms  of  the  universal  Spirit.  The 
secret  of  it  all  is  the  absoluteness  with  which  God  has 
been  revealed  to  us  by  the  Son,  so  that  he  becomes  to 
us  the  God  made  known  to  us  in  Christ.  But  the 
immediate  touch  upon  man,  that  which  imparts  life  to 
him  rather  than  any  knowledge,  however  perfect,  is 


THE  WORK  OF  REDEMPTION  83 

that  of  the  Holy  Spirit.     Here  is  where  the  thought 
of  Paul  makes  a  distinct  advance  upon  that  of  the 
Twelve.     To  them  the  Spirit  is  sent  by  the  Son,  who  Difference 
has  been  exalted  partly  for  this  reason,  that  he  may  be  between 
empowered  to  send  to  them  this  new  power  out  of  the  Paul  and  the 
heavens.     To  Paul  the  thought  of  the  Spirit  is  not 
that  of  one  sent  by  Christ,  though  that  is  not  excluded ; 
but  the  thing  emphasised  by  him  is  that  the  Spirit 
brings  to  us  the  Christ.    Through  the  Spirit  the  general 
fact  that  in  him  God  dwells  in  us  is  translated  into 
the  more  particular  and  revelatory  fact  that  in  him 
Christ  dwells  in  us. 

Because  of  the  lack  of  this  thought,  the  Twelve  The  historic 
and  Paul  differ  in  another  particular.  In  the  thought  ^^^^^^  h^fo"^ 
of  the  Twelve,  Christ  is  withdrawn  into  the  heavens,  terms  of  uni- 
whence  he  is  to  return  only  at  the  second  coming  in  ^^rsal  spirit, 
glory.  With  Paul,  he  is  again  to  return,  but  he  is  much 
more  the  indwelling  Christ.  The  phrases  most  char- 
acteristic of  him  are  "  in  Christ,"  and  "  Christ  in  him." 
This  would  be  impossible  to  the  Twelve,  because  they 
have  been  so  accustomed  to  the  thought  of  association 
with  Christ  in  his  earthly  life,  that  it  is  not  easy  for 
them  to  pass  over  into  the  mystical  thought  of  him. 
But  the  difference  is  due  also  quite  as  much  to  the 
genius  of  the  man.  The  same  thing  which  made  it 
easy  for  Paul  to  break  through  his  extreme  Jewish 
environment,  to  grasp  the  prophetic  and  universal  ele- 
ment in  Christianity,  made  it  impossible  for  him  to 
confine  himself  to  the  Christ  who  dwelt  merely  histori- 
cally in  the  thoughts  and  memories  of  his  disciples. 
It  was  a  matter  of  necessity  to  him  that  the  Christ 
should  be  translated  into  the  terms  of  universal 
Spirit.  The  power  indwelling  in  him  was,  as  it  had 
always  been,  God,  but  it  was  God  in  Christ. 

But  we  have  not  yet  reached  the  most  distinctive 
element  in  Paul's  doctrine.     In  the  other  New  Testa- 


84  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

ment.  writings,  Christ  and  the  Spirit  are  distinct  agents ; 
in  his  doctrine  they  are  identified.  The  Divine  In- 
dweller  is  to  him  alternately  Christ  and  the  Spirit. 
And  this  interchange  is  due  to  the  fact  that  Paul  thinks 
of  the  Spirit  as  the  divine  principle  incarnate  in 
Jesus,  and  explaining  his  preexistence.^  In  the  flesh 
he  is  the  Son  of  God,  and  Son  because  of  his  identifi- 
cation with  the  Spirit  But  in  the  heavenly  state,  he 
is  the  Spirit.  This  is  not  a  familiar  idea  to  us,  whose 
doctrine  includes  the  Son  as  well  as  the  Father  and 
the  Spirit  in  the  Godhead.  But  to  the  Jews,  whose 
doctrine  included  a  personal  God,  and  an  impersonal 
Spirit  emanating  from  him,  incarnation  would  be 
restricted  to  these.  And  inasmuch  as  Paul  identifies 
Son  and  Spirit,  but  never  Son  and  Father,  the  princi- 
ple of  incarnation  is  necessarily  the  Spirit.^  Alexan- 
drianism  is  the  source  of  the  doctrine  of  the  incarnation 
of  the  Logos,  and  Paul  was  not  an  Alexandrian  Jew. 

1  Seep.  92 sq.  'Rom.  1:4. 

8  For  further  discussion  of  the  Pauline  doctrine  of  the  Spirit, 
see  Stevens,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  431-445;  Cone,  Paul,  the 
Man,  the  Missionary,  and  the  Teacher,  311-341  ;  Beyschlag, 
New  Testament  Theology,  II,  204-216  ;  Holtzmann,  Neutesta- 
mentliche  Theologie,  II,  143  sq. ;  Pfleiderer,  Paulinism,  I, 
192  sq. ;  Bruce,  St.  PauVs  Conception  of  Christianity,  242- 
256;  Swete,  Art.  "Holy  Spirit,"  Hastings'  Diet.;  Gunkel, 
Die  Wirkungen  des  Heiligen  Oeistes  nach  der  populdren  An- 
schauung  der  apostolischen  Zeit  und  nach  der  Apostels  Paulus  ; 
Gloel,  Der  Heilige  Geist  in  der  Heilsverkundigung  des  Paulus  ; 
Kahnis,  Lehre  voni  h.  Geiste,  Bd.  I ;  Gaume,  Traite  du  S. 
Esprit;  Smeaton,  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  COMPLETION  OF  THE  WORK  OF  SALVATION 

The  beginning  of  the  work  of  redemption  is  to  the  apos-  Stages  in  the 
tie  this  bringing  of  the  man  into  the  state  of  righteous-  proc^s**^'^ 
ness,  making  him  inwardly  righteous  in  the  first  place, 
and  instating  him  in  the  position  of  the  righteous  man 
through  the  expiatory  sacrifice  of  our  Lord  in  the  sec- 
ond place.  Of  this  new  life  of  righteousness  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  the  divine  agent,  working  in  man  an  obedi- 
ence to  the  righteousness  of  the  law  which  the  law 
itself  had  been  unable  to  accomplish.  But  now  it  is 
impossible,  in  the  apostle's  thought,  that  this  should 
complete  the  work  of  redemption,  considered  even  as 
the  deliverance  of  the  man  from  sin.  For  it  is  the 
deliverance  of  the  spirit  only,  and  not  of  the  body. 
The  body,  he  says,  is  dead  because  of  sin,  but  the 
spirit  is  life  because  of  righteousness.^  But  the  body, 
or  the  flesh,  the  two  being  interchangeable  terms  in 
this  discussion,  is  the  seat  of  sin,  and  therefore,  imtil 
that  is  redeemed,  the  work  of  salvation  is  manifestly 
unfinished.  What  has  been  done  so  far  is  to  free  the 
spirit,  the  man  himself,  from  the  dominion  of  the  flesh, 
but  not  to  redeem  the  body.^  The  sinful  life  is  the 
life  according  to  the  flesh,  and  therefore,  as  long  as 
that  remains  unchanged,  man  cannot  be  said  to  be  free 
from  sin.  Moreover,  what  is  equally  important  in  this 
system,  the  power  of  death  has  been  only  partly 

1  Rom.  8  :  10.  2  Rom.  7  :  24,  25 ;  8  :  2-lL 

85 


86 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Twofold 
aspect  of 
death. 


Redemption 
completed 
only  by  the 
resurrection 
of  the  body. 


broken,  and  it  is  the  breaking  of  this  power  which  is 
Paul's  ultimate  thought  about  salvation.*  It  is  impor- 
tant to  remember  that  Paul  divides  the  articulum  mor- 
tis into  these  two  parts  —  the  death  of  the  spirit  as 
well  as  of  the  body.  He  speaks  more  than  once  of  the 
present  life  of  believers  as  a  state  of  newness  of  life, 
and  argues  from  this  that  they  ought  not  to  yield  to 
the  impulses  of  the  mortal  body.  It  is  a  law  of  sin 
and  death  that  rules  them  in  their  natural  state,  and 
it  is  a  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  which 
delivers  them  as  a  present  fact  from  this  state  of  death.^ 
The  completion  of  the  work  of  salvation  is  the  rescue 
of  body  as  well  as  spirit  from  sin  and  death.  The 
difficulty  with  the  present  body  is,  that  it  is  corrupti- 
ble, that  is,  subject  to  decay  and  vulnerable  to  sin.  The 
two  great  enemies  of  man,  sin  and  death,  have  it  in 
subjection.      And  the  redemption  of  man,  therefore, 


1  1  Cor.  15  :  50-58  ;  Rom.  8  :  23. 

2  The  present  state  of  the  believer  is  one  of  bodily  death 
because  of  sin,  but  of  spiritual  life  because  of  righteousness. 
This  would  mean  nothing,  except  as  it  implies  a  previous  state 
of  spiritual  death,  and  a  passage  out  of  that  into  the  present 
state  of  spiritual  life.  The  believer  is  alive  now,  and  was 
before  dead  ;  and  this  is  not  a  virtual  death  and  life,  by  way 
of  anticipation  of  the  future,  because  they  are  states  domi- 
nating the  life  of  the  man,  — states  of  spiritual  power.  (Rom. 
6  :  12-14  ;  8  :  2-11.)  Rom.  8  :  10,  11  is  an  exact  statement  of 
this  division.  The  body  of  the  believer  is  said  to  be  dead 
because  of  sin,  but  the  spirit  is  life  because  of  righteousness. 
"But  if  the  Spirit  of  him  who  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead 
dwell  in  you,  he  who  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead  will  also 
qiucken  your  mortal  bodies  through  his  Spirit  that  dwells  in 
you."  Death  is  finally  conquered,  according  to  the  apostle, 
only  in  the  resurrection,  and  death  is  therefore  to  him  what 
it  means  ordinarily  —  the  destruction  of  the  body.  This  is 
the  consequence  of  sin.  But  this  is  not  the  whole  of  the 
story.  There  is  a  death  of  the  spirit  and  also  a  resurrection, 
a  quickening,  of  the  spirit,  which  belongs  to  the  present  life. 


THE  WORK  OF  SALVATION  87 

would  be  incomplete  on  both  sides,  without  the  resur- 
rection. Man's  immortality  has  nothing  to  do  with 
this ;  the  apostle  seems  to  believe  in  that,  irrespective 
of  the  resurrection.  Before  the  resurrection,  and  irre- 
spective of  it,  man's  spirit  exists  in  the  dreary  disem- 
bodied state,  and  all  alike,  righteous  and  sinners,  are  to 
appear  before  the  judgment  seat.  But  the  completion 
of  the  work  of  Christ  is  to  provide  those  who  believe 
in  him  with  a  new  body.  The  work  is  not  done,  how- 
ever, with  the  reincarnation  of  the  man ;  it  is  complete 
only  in  the  glorification  of  the  body.  Instead  of  the 
idea,  which  some  literalists  insist  upon,  that  the 
materials  of  the  old  body  are  to  be  diligently  gathered, 
and  put  together  again,^  the  very  point  of  the  apostle's 
statement  is,  that  the  body  is  to  be  of  new  material ; 
the  old  material,  the  flesh,  being  cast  aside  as  worth- 
less. "Thou  sowest  not  the  body  which  shall  be,"  the 
apostle  says  explicitly.^  It  is  sarkical,  earthy,  subject 
to  decay,  fit  only  for  the  lower  part,  the  psyche;  while  The  repre- 
the  new  body  is  to  be  incorruptible,  and  fit  for  the  glpSiLnce 
abode  of  the  higher  part,  the  spirit  of  man.  This  is  of  Jesus, 
accomplished  for  man  through  the  resurrection  of 
Christ.  He  was  provided  with  a  body  of  this  same 
sarkical  stuff,  subject  to  death  like  the  rest  of  men. 
But  he  rose  again,  achieving  the  double  victory  over 
sin  while  in  the  vulnerable  flesh,  and  over  death  by 
his  own  resurrection  in  the  new  body  freed  from  the 
taint  of  the  flesh.  No  wonder  that,  with  Paul's  idea 
of  the  original  trouble  as  being  in  the  flesh,  the  mate- 
rial of  the  body,  he  should  not  be  satisfied  with  any 
temporary  dominance  of  the  spirit  over  the  encumber- 
ing flesh,  but  only  with  the  final  act  in  which  that 

1  Thus  Jerome,  the  risen  "  habent  dentes,  ventrem,  genitalia,  i 
et  tamen  nee  cibis  nee  uzoribus  indigent.''*                                             j 

2  1  Cor.  15 :  37. 


88 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


fleshly  body  is  replaced  by  a  new  body  of  a  new 
material.^ 

But  the  apostle's  programme  is  not  yet  complete. 
Man's  environment  is  as  poor  as  his  physical  investi- 
ture. He  is  the  inhabitant  of  a  world  that  shares  his 
fate.  The  whole  creation  is  subject  to  the  same  decay 
as  man  himself,  and  cries  to  be  delivered  from  it. 
The  cause  of  this  is  to  be  found  evidently  in  the  state 
of  its  inhabitants,  their  mortality  being  shared  by  the 
rest  of  creation,  and  creation  therefore  waits  for  the 
freeing  of  the  sous  of  God  as  a  signal  for  its  own 
emancipation.^ 

This  completes  the  apostle's  splendid  programme. 
But  before  we  close  our  survey  of  it,  we  must  see  how 
at  each  step  it  grows  out  of  the  exigencies  of  his 
thought.  In  the  first  place,  as  we  have  seen,  immor- 
tality is  presupposed,  not  included  in  it.  All  men 
survive  death  and  come  to  judgment,  and  immortality, 
that  is,  the  persistence  of  the  soul  after  death,  is 
therefore  natural,  and  is  not  included  in  the  awards 
of  the  judgment.  The  d<f)6ap(rLav  of  Rom.  2 :  7  is  not 
immortality,  but  incorruption,  which  is  explained^  to 
be  a  quality  of  the  body,  not  of  the  soul.  No,  the 
penalty  of  sin  is  the  death  of  both  soul  and  body. 
The  death  of  the  soul  is  that  which  comes  with  the 


1  Kom.  7  :  5,  18,  25  ;  8  :  3,  5-13  ;  1  Cor.  15  :  35-68  ;  2  Cor. 
6 : 1-10.  It  is  worth  noticing  that  Paul  is  here  at  one  also  with 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  in  so  far  as  we  have  it  preserved.  Over 
against  the  crass  physical  reanimation  of  the  body  taught  by 
the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  of  Baruch  (xlix,  2,  3)  and  the 
(possibly  later)  scribes  (Charles,  Eschatology,  280  sq.  ;  Weber, 
JUdische  Theologie,  371  sq.),  Jesus  sets  the  clear  statement 
(Lk.  20  :  35,  36)  that  in  the  resurrection  animal  qualities  are  at 
an  end  and  men  are  to  be  like  angels.  But  this  is  something 
other  than  being  sexless. 

2  Rom.  8  :  19-22. 

8  1  Cor.  15 :  42,  50-54. 


THE  WORK  OF  SALVATION  89 

first  entrance  of  sin  as  a  voluntary  factor  in  the  con- 
scious life  of  the  man,  and  is  replaced  by  the  life  of 
the  spirit  which  comes  with  the  setting  up  of  right- 
eousness as  the  dominant  principle  instead  of  sin.^  Of 
this  new  life  of  the  spirit,  our  Lord  is  the  author,  and 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  agent.^  But  this  spiritual 
renewal  leaves  several  demands  unsatisfied.  In  the 
first  place,  there  is  the  demand  of  the  divine  right- 
eousness that  it  be  satisfied  in  some  way  corresponding 
to  the  sacrificial  satisfaction  of  the  law.  In  this  part 
of  his  teaching,  Paul  is  influenced  by  the  priestly 
thought,  of  which  the  prophets  denied  the  validity, 
that  God  demands  other  satisfaction  than  repentance. 
This  demand  is  met  by  the  sacrifice  of  our  Lord.' 
Another  lack  of  completeness  is  the  continuance  of 
the  union  of  the  renewed  spirit  with  a  body  which  is 
vulnerable  to  sin,  which  has  been  the  chief  source  of 
man's  moral  weakness.*  So  that,  on  the  side  of  man's 
spiritual  renewal  even,  there  is  a  call  for  something 
else  than  merely  the  restoration  of  the  life  of  the 
spirit  itself.  Not  even  that  will  fortify  it  completely  its  logical 
against  sin,  as  long  as  the  fleshly  body  remains.  It  Qg^^^°^*" 
will  be  in  a  state  of  perpetual  conflict,  with  the  chances 
in  favour  of  the  spirit,  which  is  now  allied  with  the 
Spirit  of  God,  but  out  of  which  the  spirit  cries  to  be 
delivered  from  this  body  of  death.*  But  then,  this 
renewal  of  the  body  is  demanded  not  only  for  the 
completion  of  the  emancipation  of  the  spirit,  but  also 
for  its  own  sake.  In  the  first  place,  the  soul  is 
wretched  without  a  body,  and  its  earthly  tabernacle  is 
destroyed  by  death.®  But  then,  the  soul  not  only 
needs  a  body,  it  needs  a  body  free  from  sin  and  death, 
made,  therefore,  of  a  new  material ;  and  the  resurrec- 

1  Rom.  7  :  7-13  ;  8  :  10.  *  Rom.  8  :  .3. 

2  Rom.  8  :  2,  3.  «  Roiii.  7  :  24  ;  Gal.  5:17. 
8  Rom.  3  :  25,  26.                              «  2  Cor.  6  : 1-8. 


90  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

tion  is  therefore  not  simply  a  resurrection,  it  is  a 
change,  a  glorification  of  the  body.^  And,  finally,  the 
renewed  man  wants  a  new  home,  as  this  world  has 
been  accommodated  to  the  old  man,  and  is  subject  to 
the  same  evil  of  mortality  and  futility  as  the  man 
himself.  For  this  purpose,  the  apostle  provides  in 
his  thought  not  a  heavenly  abode,  but  a  renewed  and 
emancipated  world,  which  is  to  be  the  domicile  of  the 
risen  humanity.  In  this  way,  it  will  be  seen  how  every 
part  of  the  apostle's  programme  of  redemption  is 
occasioned  by  the  exigencies  of  his  thought;  it  is  a 
reasoned  process  throughout. 

With  the  close  of  the  work  of  redemption,  the 
Messianic  reign  is  to  come  to  an  end.  In  this  matter, 
as  in  all  the  rest,  the  apostle  is  guided  by  the  exigen- 
cies of  his  thought.  He  quotes  from  Ps.  8 : 6,  that 
God  put  all  things  under  the  feet  of  the  Son  of  Man. 
From  this  he  argues  that  he  must  reign  till  all  things 
have  been  subjected  to  him,  the  last  enemy  to  be 
destroyed  being  death.  But  it  is  manifest  that  God 
himself  must  be  excepted  from  this  universal  reign, 
that  he  is  to  become  all  in  all.  And  so,  when  this 
purpose  of  the  Messianic  reign  has  been  accomplished, 
this  ultimate  purpose  of  the  divine  sovereignty  must 
replace  even  the  temporary  purpose  of  the  Messianic 
reign,  and  Christ  himself  be  included  in  this  universal 
rule  of  God.*  This  is  different  from  the  programme  of 
the  Twelve,  according  to  which  even  the  work  of  the 
Messianic  Prince  in  heaven  is  to  be  preliminary  to  his 
real  reign,  which  is  to  begin  with  his  return  to  this 
earth.  But  according  to  the  apostle,  that  reign, 
instead  of  beginning  then,  is  to  end  then.  For  with 
this  return  the  resurrection  is  to  take  place,  and  with 
this  that  victory  over  the  last  enemy,  death,  which  is 

1  1  Cor.  15  :  42-49.  *  1  Cor.  16  :  24-28. 


THE  WORK  OF  SALVATION  91 

to  close  the  Messiah's  reign,  since  it  accomplishes  the 
purpose  for  which  the  Messiah  was  appointed  to 
reign. 

As  to  when  all  this  is  to  take  place,  Paul  is  careful  Time  of 
to  say  that  he  hopes  for  the  resurrection  within  his  ^ngof  Christ 
own  lifetime,  but  is  certain  of  it  within  that  of  his 
contemporaries.^  Here  is  the  secret  of  his  own  mis- 
sionary activity.  The  vast  Eoman  world  is  to  be 
converted,  and  then  at  last  the  Jews  are  to  be  brought 
in,  and  all  within  this  limited  time.  No  wonder  that 
the  apathy  of  the  Twelve  and  of  the  Jewish  Church 
seemed  something  inexplicable,  and  that  he  threw 
himself  into  the  breach  with  an  unexampled  activity.'' 

1 1  Cor.  15  :  51,  52  ;  2  Cor.  5  :  IS. 

2  On  the  Pauline  eschatology,  see  Stevens,  Theology  of  the 
N.  T.,  470-482  ;  Cone,  Paul,  the  Man,  the  Missionary,  and  the 
Teacher,  423-457 ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  II,  52-74 ; 
Beyschlag,  New  Testament  Theology,  II,  254-281 ;  Holtzmann, 
Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  187-203  ;  Bovon,  Theologie 
du  N.  T.,  II,  309-351;  Pfleiderer,  Paulinism,  I,  259-276; 
Bruce,  St.PauVs  Conception  of  Christianity,  379-396  ;  Salmond, 
Art.  "Eschatology,"  Hastings'  Diet. ;  Kabisch,  Die  Eschatologie 
des  Paulus ;  Charles,  Eschatology,  Hebrew,  Jewish,  and  Chris- 
tian, 380^05. 


CHAPTER  V 


THE  PAULINE  CHRISTOLOGY 


Office  of 
our  Lord 
deliverauce, 
rather  than 
sovereignty. 


Paul's 
silence  as  to 
the  life  of 
Jesus. 


The  idea  of  the  kingdom  drops  into  a  position  of 
comparative  insignificance  in  Paul's  writings.  Where 
it  does  appear,  it  is  as  the  kingdom  of  God.  Christ 
does  not  figure  as  the  Messianic  King,  except  in  the 
passage  quoted  above  about  the  end  of  his  reign.  This 
is  not  incompatible  with  his  Messianic  character,  since 
the  national  idea  of  the  Messiah  was  that  of  Prince 
and  Saviour.  He  was  to  deliver  his  people  from  their 
enemies.  But  in  that  Messianic  thought  of  the  people 
this  deliverance  was  always  associated  with  his  reign, 
and  in  the  spiritual  form  in  which  this  is  presented  in 
Christ's  own  teaching  the  note  of  authority  is  always 
preserved.  The  same  is  true  of  the  teaching  of  the 
Twelve.  But  the  office  of  our  Lord,  as  Paul  looked  at 
it,  was  redemptive  in  such  a  sort  as  to  obscure  the 
sovereignty.  Por  the  purposes  of  his  doctrine  we  can 
practically  leave  out  of  sight  everything  in  Jesus' 
life  up  to  the  time  of  his  death ;  for  while  Paul  quotes 
sometimes  from  Jesus'  teachings,  he  does  not  dwell  in 
any  way  upon  the  life  or  work  of  our  Lord,  except  as 
they  are  involved  in  his  death  and  resurrection.  But 
these  events,  though  they  lend  themselves  readily  to 
discourse  of  our  Lord's  real  sovereignty,  are  not  used 
for  the  enforcement  of  that  at  all.  They  are  occa- 
sioned by  the  sin  and  death  of  man,  and  are  intended 
to  effect  man's  deliverance  from  these  evils.  And 
these  evils  are  always  regarded  not  as  an  impairment 

92 


THE  PAULINE  CIIlilSTOLOGY 


91 


of  Jesus. 


of  the  divine  sovereignty,  but  as  a  supreme  loss  to  the 
man  himself.  And  in  Christ's  heavenly  office,  it  is 
his  identity  with  the  Spirit  in  his  regenerating  and 
renewing  office  that  is  emphasised.  This  is  not  to 
deny  that  the  apostle's  teaching  can  be  brought  to 
bear  for  the  enforcements  of  the  rule  of  the  kingdom, 
but  that  he  himself  does  not  bring  it  to  bear  expressly, 
as  he  would  if  the  thought  of  the  kingdom  had  been 
prominent  in  his  mind. 

Such  a  position  as  this  implies  a  reconstruction  of  The  person 
the  idea  of  our  Lord's  person.  He  becomes  a  mystical 
being,  endowed  with  a  spiritual  force,  and  this  spir- 
itual force  is  not  derived  from  the  power  of  our 
Lord's  life  still  living  on  in  the  world,  and  perpetu- 
ating itself  in  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men,  but  is 
due  to  his  own  presence.  But  this  influence  in  human 
affairs  is  possessed  by  the  heavenly  powers  alone,  and 
to  attribute  it  to  Jesus  is  to  associate  him  with  those 
heavenly  powers.  That  is,  this  being  who.  during  his 
life,  and  now  after  his  death,  wielded  such  a  power 
over  men,  was  not  a  mere  man,  but  came  into  this 
world  from  another  sphere.  This  is  the  first  point  in 
Paul's  reconstructed  Christology,  his  affirmation  of 
our  Lord's  preexistence.^  But  in  what  form  was  his 
heavenly  life  ?  He  was  God,  some  say,  not  as  an 
expression  of  their  own  opinion,  but  as  interpreters  of 
Paul's  thought.  They  quote  for  this  purpose  Rom. 
9 : 5.  But  all  that  can  be  said  in  favour  of  this  inter- 
pretation, according  to  which  Jesus  is  here  called  God, 
is  that  it  is  a  natural  explanation,  probably  the  natural 
explanation  of  the  passage  as  it  stands,  supposing  there 
is  nothing  against  it.  But  on  the  other  side  is  the  fact 
that  it  stands  absolutely  alone  in  the  apostle's  writings. 
There  is  nothing  else  to  be  classed  with  it,  and  on  the 


His  preex- 
istence:  not 
as  God 


1  2  Cor.  8:9;  Rom.  10  :  G  ;  1  Cor.  8  :  6. 


94.  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

contrary,  much  that  is  simply  incompatible  with  it.* 
The  interpretation,  therefore,  which  resolves  this  into 
a  doxology,  while  not  in  itself  so  natural,  is  very  pos- 
sible, and  being  possible,  there  is  no  doubt  of  its 
correspondence  with  Paul's  thought.^ 

Another  answer  to  the  question  that  we  have  raised 
is,  that  the  form  of  our  Lord's  heavenly  existence  was 
that  of  man,  not  of  man  in  his  present  fleshly  state, 
but  of  a  heavenly  man,  the  typical  man  of  whom  all 
individual  men  are  but  the  images,  a  being  identified 
with  the  Spirit  of  God.  A  statement  like  this,  so 
strange  in  its  implications,  ought  to  be  strongly  sup- 
ported, but  instead  of  this,  there  is  only  one  passage 
which  is  cited,  or  can  be  cited  as  containing  anything 
like  this.  1  Cor.  15 :  47  says  that  "the  first  man  was 
of  the  earth  earthy;  the  second  man  was  the  Lord 
from  heaven.  The  first  man,  Adam,  became  a  living 
soul ;  the  second  became  a  life-giving  spirit."  But  the 
very  thing  which  is  needed  to  give  this  passage  the 
required  meaning  is  wanting.  It  does  not  affirm  man- 
hood of  the  preexistent,  heavenly  state,  but  of  the 
earthly  state.  Manhood  was  the  acknowledged  form 
of  his  existence  here,  and  would  be  understood  to  refer 
to  that  in  this  passage,  unless  there  were  some  direct 
statement  to  the  contrary ;  but  the  statement  is  that 
this  being  who  lived  here  in  the  form  of  a  man  was  not 
a  man  from  heaven,  but  the  Lord  from  heaven.  This 
leaves  unanswered,  therefore,  the  question  as  to  the 
form  of  his  heavenly  life.  Further,  the  part  of  this 
interpretation  which  makes  him  the  archetypal  man 
of  whom  individual  men  are  only  the  copies,  is  from 
the  Jewish  theology,  to  be  sure,  but  from  which  part 
of  that  theology  ?  It  is  the  Hellenistic,  Alexandrian 
Judaism,  from  which  that  is  taken,  and  Paul  was  not 

1  Rom.  8  :  34  ;  1  Cor.  15  :  24-28  ;  8  :  6. 

*  "  He  who  is  God  over  all  be  blessed  forever." 


THE  PAULINE  CHRISTOLOGY 


95 


an  Alexandrian,  he  was  distinctly  a  Pharisaic  Jew.^ 
This  passage,  describing  him  as  a  zealot  for  the  an- 
cestral traditions,  would  be  an  absurd  statement  from 
an  Alexandrian  Jew. 

The  identification  of  this  heavenly  man  with  the 
Spirit  is  absurdly  incongruous.  It  is  evident  that 
the  life-giving  spirit  of  this  passage  is  not  identi- 
fied with  God,  but  with  man  rather.  But  can  any- 
thing be  more  evident  than  that  the  Spirit  of  Paul's 
writings  is  to  be  identified  with  God,  that  it  is  a 
divinity  working  in  the  souls  of  men  ?  To  say  that  it 
is  a  heavenly  man  is  simply  to  forget  all  that  the 
apostle  says  about  it.  Can  it  be  everywhere  present,  a 
divine  spirit  dwelling  in  the  hearts  of  man,  and  yet 
a  heavenly  man  ?  Man  is  a  localised  individual  being, 
while  the  very  essential  attribute  of  the  Spirit  is  this 
universal  diffusion.  Then  the  statement  of  Christ's 
change  of  state  is  that  he  became  man,  not  that  he 
passed  from  the  state  of  a  spiritual  man  into  that  of  a 
fleshly  man.  If  the  latter  had  been  meant,  it  must 
have  been  said  somewhere  definitely. 

There  is  one  thing  in  which  we  must  not  misunder- 
stand Paul.  To  him  it  was  not  the  preexistent  Christ 
that  explains  the  power  and  work  of  our  Lord.  It 
was  not  the  different  conditions  of  that  heavenly  life 

1  Gal.  1 :  14.  On  the  Christology  of  Paul  in  general,  see 
Stevens,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  389-402;  Beysclilag,  New 
Testament  Theology,  II,  ch.  3 ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  I, 
390-419 ;  Iloltzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Tlieologie,  II,  Qo-'dl ; 
Bovon,  Theologie  du  N.  T,  II,  253-308;  Brace,  St.  PauVs 
Conception  of  Christianity,  327-343 ;  Pfleiderer,  Paulinism, 
I,  123-159 ;  Cone,  Paiil,  the  Man,  the  Missionary,  and  the 
Teacher,  280-310 ;  Weizsacker,  77te  Apostolic  Age,  I,  144  sq. ; 
M^u^goz,  Le  Peche  et  la  Pklemption  d'apres  St.  Paul,  157-209 ; 
Beet,  Art.  "Christology,"  Hastings'  Diet.;  Sommerville,  St. 
PauVs  Conception  of  Christ;  Gifford,  The  Incarnation:  a 
Study  of  Phil.  2 :  5-11. 


A  preexist- 
ent man  not 
the  Spirit. 


The  risen 
more  than 
the  preexist- 
ent  Christ 
interests 
Paul. 


96 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


through  which  he  achieved  the  salvation  of  men;  it 
was  his  victory  over  the  conditions  of  life  which  he 
shared  with  men,  by  which  he  saved  them.  His  power 
to  dispossess  sin  in  the  flesh,  and  replace  it  with  a 
spirit  of  obedience,  is  due  to  his  partaking  of  our 
fleshly  nature.  His  death  would  be  possible  only  to 
an  incarnate  man,  not  to  an  unfleshed  spirit.  His 
resurrection,  carrying  with  it  our  victory  over  death, 
was  his  victory  over  the  flesh,  not  only  overbearing  it 
by  the  spirit,  as  in  his  sinless  life,  but  replacing  it 
with  a  nobler  body  made  of  a  different  stuif.  To  be 
sure,  it  was  the  glorified  Christ  upon  whom  Paul  gazed 
near  Damascus,  but  it  was  not  the  glory  of  the  pre- 
incarnate  Christ,  it  was  the  brightness  of  the  risen 
Christ.  And  it  was  the  risen  Christ  who  was  the  Son 
of  God,  the  image  of  God,  not  the  preexistent  Christ.^ 
The  most  probable  view  is  that  Paul  thought  of  the 
Spirit  as  the  form  of  Christ's  preexistent  nature.  This 
Spirit  as  the  answer  is  advanced  difiidently,  as  there  are  so  few  mate- 
Ctu-lstf  ^"  i'i3.1s  for  the  determination  of  the  question.  But  there 
is  no  question  that  our  Lord  and  the  Holy  Spirit  are 
identified  in  some  sense  in  Paul's  writings,  and  it  seems 
as  if  this  must  be  the  sense  intended.^  The  direct 
statement  of  this  identity  is  in  2  Cor.  3 :  17,  18.  What 
it  immediately  suggests  is  the  interchange  of  Christ 
and  the  Spirit  as  the  indwelling  powers  in  the  regen- 
erate man.  The  ordinary  explanation  of  this  inter- 
change is,  that  the  Spirit  brings  to  men  the  things  of 
Jesus  Christ,  makes  his  life,  death,  teachings,  and  res- 
urrection active  influences  in  us.  It  would  also  be 
explained  in  part  by  the  fact  that  the  Spirit  dwelt  in 
Jesus  during  his  earthly  life,  and  was  the  source  in 
him  of  his  supernatural  and  gracious  power.    The  first 

1  2  Cor.  4:4;  Rom.  1  :  4  ;  5 :  10,  11  ;  8  :  3,  29,  32  ;  1  Cor. 
15  :  28  ;  2  Cor.  1:9;  Gal.  1  :  16  ;  4:4. 

2  Rom.  8  :  9  ;  2  Cor.  3 :  17,  18  ;  Gal.  4:6;  also  Rom.  1 :  4- 


Paul  prob- 
ably re- 
garded the 


THE  PAULINE  CHRISTOLOGT  97 

of  these  is  emphasised  by  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  the 
second  by  all  the  Gospels.  But  while  the  fourth  Gos- 
pel contrasts  Christ's  person  with  the  Spirit  who  rep- 
resents the  Father,  saying  that  certain  things  in  Jesus 
came  not  from  himself,  but  from  the  Father  or  the 
Spirit,  Paul  seems  to  identify  them,  so  that  we  get  the 
idea,  not  that  our  Lord's  spirit  was  reenforced  by  the 
Divine  Spirit,  but  that  the  two  were  identical,  in  other 
words  that  Jesus  was  an  incarnation  of  the  Spirit  of 
God.^  In  Kom.  1 : 4,  the  spirit  of  holiness  corresponds  Passages 
to  the  flesh  in  the  other  part  of  the  statement,  and  is  ""Plying 
therefore  a  designation  of  the  other  side  of  Christ's 
own  nature.  But  "the  spirit  of  holiness"  is  the 
equivalent  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  is  probably  a 
designation  of  the  spiritual  nature  of  our  Lord  as 
identical  with  the  Spirit,  and  not  simply  inhabited  by 
the  Holy  Spirit.  The  same  identity  of  the  Spirit  with 
the  spirit  of  Christ  throws  light  upon  the  expression, 
"the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus." ^  The  identifica- 
tion of  the  Spirit  with  the  mind  of  Christ^  does  not 
require  this  for  its  explanation,  but  it  is  greatly  illumi- 
nated by  it. 

There  are  only  two  references  to  the  preexistent 
state  itself,  all  the  rest  being  statements  of  Jesus' 
emergence  from  that  into  this  world.  These  state- 
ments in  regard  to  the  state  itself  are,  that  it  was  a 
state  of  glory,  contrasted  with  the  poverty  of  man's 
present  state ;  *  and  that  all  things  are  through  him.® 
The  former  is  not  decisive,  but  the  latter  corresponds 
to  the  Old  Testament  statement  that  the  Spirit  was 
the  divine  agent  in  creation.  When  we  come  to  the 
earthly  stage  of  our  Lord's  existence,  this  explains  Nature  of 
tlie  statement  of  his  souship.  Men  are  sons  of  God  sonshh'"'^ 
through  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit,  but  our  Lord 

1  Jn.  1  :  32,  33  ;  3  :  34.  2  Rora.  8  :  2. 

«  1  Cor.  2  :  11-lG.  *  2  Cor.  8:9.  ^  Cur.  8 :  0. 


98 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  influ- 
ence of 
Paul's 
theological 
antecedents 
here. 


is  evidently  called  God's  own  Son  in  order  to  dis- 
tinguish him  from  the  common  mass  of  those  bear- 
ing this  title,  because  he  has  not  only  the  Spirit 
indwelling  with  his  spirit,  but  is  himself  identified 
with  the  Spirit.  This  does  not  identify  him  with 
humanity  on  the  side  of  his  spiritual  nature,  but 
neither  does  it  put  him  out  of  sympathy  with  men, 
because  the  trouble  with  men  is  not  so  much,  accord- 
ing to  Paul,  in  their  spiritual  part,  but  in  the  alli- 
ance of  that  with  the  fleshly  body.  This  Jesus  shares 
with  us,  and  it  means  that  he  shares  what  is  man's 
distinctive  weakness.  In  us  there  is  a  lower  spiritual 
part  inhabiting  the  body  and  subject  to  its  weakness. 
But  there  is  another  part  dwelling  within,  apart  from 
the  flesh  and  akin  to  the  Spirit,  which  is  not  so  subject. 
In  regeneration  partial  victory  is  obtained  over  the  flesh 
by  the  association  with  the  spirit  of  man  of  the  Spirit 
of  God.  Jesus'  complete  victory  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  spiritual  part  is  itself  the  Spirit.  But  now,  freedom 
from  the  flesh  is  obtained  by  Christ  at  his  resurrec- 
tion, when  he  becomes  Son  of  God  for  the  first  time 
in  the  full  sense.  And  this  resurrection,  with  its  free- 
dom from  the  flesh,  he  obtains,  not  only  for  himself, 
but  for  us.  But  this  resurrection,  in  both  his  case  and 
ours,  is  due  to  the  Spirit. 

We  must  not  forget  the  probabilities  in  this  matter 
arising  from  Paul's  theological  antecedents.  The  idea 
of  incarnation  was  not  natural  to  a  Jew,  but  there  were 
two  possible  provisions  for  it  in  his  thought.  Nothing 
in  Judaism  itself  would  suggest  it,  but  it  would  have 
to  come  from  elsewhere,  in  this  case  from  the  actual 
unique  greatness  of  Jesus,  which  seemed  to  the  dis- 
ciples supernatural.  The  source  of  this  might  be 
angelic,  an  idea  indeed  which  was  exploited  in  the 
early  stages  of  Christian  Alexandrianism,  and  com- 
bated in  the  New  Testament  writings  of  that  period. 


THE  PAULINE  CHRISTOLOGT  99 

But  with  Paul  this  was  no  sooner  conceived  than  set 
aside.  Such  greatness,  to  his  mind,  suggested  some 
sort  of  identification  with  God.  Some  such  identifi- 
cation was  attributed  by  the  Jews  to  kings  and  proph- 
ets, but  the  unique  greatness  of  Jesus  suggested  a  new 
form  of  it.  He  seemed  to  his  disciples,  not  at  first, 
but  as  he  grew  upon  their  thought  as  the  source  of 
their  spiritual  life,  to  be  nothing  short  of  an  incarna- 
tion of  the  Divine.  And  there  were  two  possible 
chances  of  such  an  incarnation.  To  a  Palestinian 
Jew,  the  Spirit,  who  was  the  inspiration  of  human 
greatness,  would  be  the  divine  principle  of  incarna- 
tion. And  to  a  Hellenistic  Jew,  to  whom  the  Logos 
was  the  life  and  light  of  men,  the  Logos  would  be  the 
principle  of  incarnation.  This  explains,  then,  the 
thought  of  Paul.  Jesus  had  become  to  him  an  in- 
dweller,  and  this  could  suggest  to  his  mind  nothing 
more  nor  less  than  an  identification  of  the  Lord  with 
the  Spirit. 

Of  the  other  Pauline  Epistles,  Philippians  and  Phile-  The  Chris- 
mon  belong  in  the  same  class  as  the  earlier  epistles  in  ^y^^^  "^  ^^^ 
both  subject-matter,  treatment,  and  style.    There  is  Pauline 
only  one  doctrinal  statement  that  makes  any  advance  ^P^^"^^- 
on  the  earlier  epistles,  viz.  the  famous  passage  Phil. 
2 : 5-11.     In  the  earlier  epistles,  the  position  of  our 
Lord  is  assumed  rather  than  stated,  except  in  Eom.  1 : 
3,  4.     In  that  passage  the  sonship  to  David  is  so  con- 
trasted with  the  divine  sonship  as  to  leave  little  doubt 
that  Paul  means  by  the  latter  what  would  correspond 
to  the  former,  a  real  sonship,  involving  kindred  nature. 
But  in  this  Philippian  passage,  the  occasion  leads  up  to 
a  full  statement  which  is  important  in  arriving  at  an 
understanding  of  the  apostle's  position.     He  exhorts 
the  Philippians  to  entertain  the  same  mind  in  their  re- 
lations to  each  other  as  characterised  Christ  Jesus  in 
his  voluntary  descent  from  a  divine  to  a  human  posi- 


100 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  incarna- 
tion accord- 
ing to  Phil. 
2:5-11. 


Exact  force 
of  this 
passage. 


tion.  The  divine  condition  he  describes  in  the  phrase 
lxopfl>7}  Weov,  "the  form  of  God,"  and  the  human  condi- 
tion in  the  terms  t^op^rj  8ovkov,  "the  form  of  a  ser- 
vant," ofioiwfta  Twv  avOpwTTtov,  "likeness  of  men,"  and 
iv  (TxopjOLTi  ws  avOpiOTTo^,  "  in  condition  as  a  man."  These 
phrases  all  of  them  denote  divine  and  human  condi- 
tions of  existence.  In  the  connection,  they  evidently 
denote  divine  nature  on  the  one  hand,  and  human 
nature  on  the  other,  so  far  as  each  is  implied  in  the 
limitations  imposed  upon  the  divine  nature  by  the 
confinement  of  it  in  a  human  body,  and  in  the  freedom 
from  those  limitations.  As  we  have  seen,  this  is  to  the 
apostle  the  essential  weakness  of  human  nature,  in- 
volving, not  its  sinfulness,  but  its  exposure  to  sin; 
and  Christ,  therefore,  in  assuming  that,  took  upon 
himself  not  only  the  bodily  restrictions  of  the  flesh, 
but  its  spiritual  limitations  as  well.  But  the  spirit 
inhabiting  the  fleshly  body  was  still  the  Divine  Spirit, 
and  hence  its  victory  over  sin,  its  obedience  even 
unto  death.  On  the  other  hand,  the  equality  with 
God  was  something  which  he  did  not  possess  even 
in  the  heavenly  state,  something  which  it  would  have 
been  apirayfio^  ^^ seizure"  for  him  to  assume.  The 
verb  from  which  this  comes  properly  means  to  seize, 
not  to  retain,  and  so  its  object  would  not  be  something 
already  in  possession,  but  something  to  be  possessed 
only  by  forcible  appropriation.  And  so,  the  sover- 
eignty which  comes  to  Jesus  finally  is  not  a  resump- 
tion of  what  belonged  to  him  originally,  but  a  gift, 
BioprjfjLa,  of  God  bestowed  on  him  as  a  reward  of  his 
humiliation  and  obedience.  The  full  statement  would 
be,  therefore,  that  Jesus,  partaking  as  he  did  of  the 
divine  form  of  existence,  did  not  regard  equality  with 
God  as  a  thing  for  him  to  seize  upon,  but  instead  of 
taking  this  step  in  advance,  took  a  leap  downward, 
and  divested  himself  of  even  that  divine  condition 


THE  PAULINE  CHBISTOLOGY  101 

which  he  possessed,  and  took  instead  the  form,  in  this 
case  involving  the  nature,  of  a  slave,  and  having  thus 
come  into  human  condition,  became  obedient  even  so 
far  as  to  yield  up  his  life  by  the  humiliating  death  of 
the  cross  (the  equivalent  of  our  gallows).  This 
humiliation  led  to  his  exaltation,  not  as  the  assumption 
on  his  part  of  an  equality  with  God  which  would  result 
from  his  original  condition  in  the  form  of  God,  nor  as 
the  resumption  of  an  original  right,  but  as  the  gift  of 
God,  who  glorified  himself  in  bringing  all  men  and 
angels  to  acknowledge  the  lordship  of  Christ.  This 
passage  is,  therefore,  in  exact  accordance  with  the 
Christology  of  the  earlier  epistles,  and  does  not  serve 
to  put  this  epistle  in  a  separate  class.^ 

1  The  resemblance  of  Philippians  to  the  earlier  epistles  is 
seen  especially  in  the  characteristic  style,  which  is  full  of 
the  apostle's  unconscious  beauty  of  speech,  —  a  beauty  which 
reflects  so  spontaneously  the  grace  and  distinction  of  the  man 
himself.  This  resemblance  makes  it  difficult  to  ascribe  the 
other  epistles  of  this  period  to  Paul ;  for  there  are  great 
differences  between  these  and  the  eai'lier  epistles,  which  the 
difference  of  period  might  account  for  if  it  were  not  for  this 
epistle,  which  belongs  to  the  period  of  the  later  epistles,  but 
has  the  characteristic  style  and  manner  of  the  earlier  epistles. 
The  difference  of  time  is,  in  any  case,  so  slight  that  it  ought 
not  to  be  brought  into  the  discussion  of  authorship.  But  this 
epistle  goes  to  show  that  the  apostle's  manner  had  not  changed, 
as  a  matter  of  fact. 


PART   IV 
THE  LATEB  APOSTOLIO  WEITINGS 


CHAPTER  I 

THE  AUTHENTICITY  OF  THE  EPISTLES  OF  JAMES 
AND   FIRST  PETER 

The  epistles  of  James  ^  and  1  Peter  present  some 
difficulties  of  a  serious  nature.  The  James  of  this 
epistle  is  not  the  James  of  tradition,  or  of  the  Pauline 
Epistles  and  the  Acts.  These  all  present  him  (though 
Acts  somewhat  modifies  the  picture)  as  a  holy  man 
after  the  Pharisaic  sort,  a  strict  legalist.  At  the  same 
time  he  has  breadth  sufficient  to  tolerate  Paulinism, 
but  not  sufficient  to  dispose  him  in  any  way  to  accept 

1  On  introduction  to  James,  see  the  volume  of  Professor  Bacon 
in  this  series,  and  in  general,  Mayor,  Art.  "James,"  Hastings' 
Diet.;  Mayor,  The  Epistle  of  James  [has  excellent  bibliography, 
ccxiv] ;  Spitta,  Crit.  Beview,  1896,  277  sq. ;  Van  Manen, 
Theol.  Tijdschrift,  July,  1897 ;  Salmon,  Introduction  to  the  N. 
r.,  448-468 ;  "Weiss,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T. ;  Zahn,  Einleitung 
in  das  N.  T.,  I,  52-108 ;  Huther,  in  the  Meyer  Series;  Bassett, 
The  Catholic  Epistle  of  St.  James;  Gloag,  Introduction  to  the 
Catholic  Epistles.  On  the  theology  of  the  epistle  see  Stevens, 
Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  276-292;  Beyschlag,  New  Testament 
Theology,  I,  337-377  ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  X.  T,  I,  248-273 ; 
Holtzmann,  JNeutestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  328-350 ;  Bovon, 
Theologie  du  N.  T.,  U,  447-462. 
102 


JAMES  AND  FIRST  PETER  103 

its  universalism  for  himself.  But  the  writer  of  the 
Epistle  of  James  has  ethical  insight,  and  spiritual  free- 
dom in  a  marked  degree.  He  misses  Paul's  greatness 
chiefly  by  his  failure  to  come  under  the  spell  of  the 
personal  Christ  in  such  a  way  that  it  becomes  the 
secret  of  his  life.  But  he  has  caught  some  of  our  Lord's  His  relation 
dominant  conceptions  with  a  rare  sympathy,  so  that  *°  "^esus. 
the  mind  of  Christ,  but  not  his  personal  spell,  is  exhib- 
ited here  in  many  essential  matters.  What  we  may 
call  the  two  dominant  notes  in  our  Lord's  teaching,  that 
God's  ultimate  demand  on  us  is  obedience,  and  that  the 
law  to  which  this  obedience  is  to  be  rendered  is  ration- 
alised and  spiritualised  —  in  other  words,  the  ethicising 
of  religion,  and  the  spiritualising  of  ethics  —  are  also 
the  dominant  notes  of  this  epistle.  The  thing  that  it 
lacks  is  the  presentation  of  Christ  as  the  suflBcient 
reason,  the  powerful  motive  and  inspiration  of  this 
obedience.  However,  this  is  replaced  by  a  presenta- 
tion of  the  reasons  for  obedience  drawn  from  the  grace 
of  God,  which  corresponds  to  our  Lord's  treatment  of 
the  same  in  the  Gospels.  But  this  return  to  the  mind 
of  our  Lord  in  regard  to  his  ultimate  object  and  demand, 
after  more  or  less  divergent  views,  is  the  noticeable 
thing  about  this  epistle.  The  word  "  kingdom  "  is  not 
here,  but  the  idea  is  prevalent.  Where  shall  we  place 
it  then?  It  is  not  the  early  work  of  James,  for  this 
is  not  the  James  of  the  Acts  and  of  the  Pauline  Epis- 
tles, who  has  not  attained  to  the  law  of  liberty  but  is 
distinctly  a  Jew  of  the  circumcision,  who  tolerates  the 
free  Paul,  but  looks  askance  at  him  all  the  same.  Nor 
is  he  a  mere  non-Christian  Jew  of  a  comparatively 
free  type,  who  has  abstracted  from  the  Old  Testament 
books  the  rational  points,  and  eliminated  the  irration- 
ality. There  is  only  one  influence  in  that  generation 
which  could  enable  a  man  to  pick  his  way  through  the 
Old  Testament  with  so  fine  a  spiritual  touch.     That  is 


104 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


learned  only  in  the  school  of  Christ.^  But  this  hypothe- 
sis is  wrecked  upon  the  epistle's  debate  on  justifica- 
tion by  faith  and  justification  by  works ;  for  in  this 
the  phraseology  is  Pauline. 

The  epistle  evidently  belongs  to  the  debate  between 
Paul  and  the  Jewish  Christians  in  regard  to  the  terms 
of  justification,  but  the  Jewish  side  of  the  controversy 
has  been  modified  by  a  change  of  view  of  the  law. 
Paul's  contention  is  against  justification  by  works 
of  the  Jewish  law,  including  circumcision  and  all  the 
ceremonial  parts  of  the  Mosaic  law,  but  his  argument 
is  directed  against  justification  under  any  scheme  of 
law;  that  is,  it  begins  with  reasoning  which  would 
allow  justification  under  the  moral  law,  but  not  under 
the  ceremonial  law ;  but  before  he  finishes,  he  directs 
his  argument  against  justification  under  any  scheme 
of  law.  Against  him  was  arrayed  a  practice  which 
insisted  on  obedience  to  the  whole  of  Mosaism.  But 
here  we  have  the  whole  character  of  the  discussion 
changed  by  substituting  for  Mosaism  —  that  mixed 
law  of  morals  and  ceremonialism  —  the  law  of  liberty 
which  eliminates  the  ceremonial  element,  and  insists 
that  justification  is  by  the  ethical  remainder.  To 
whom  is  this  change  to  be  attributed  ?  To  Paul  and 
Peter  in  part,  but  most  of  all  to  the  Gospel  narrative 
of  Jesus. 

In  order  to  appreciate  this  answer  to  the  question,  it 
is  necessary  to  examine  the  authorship  of  the  other 
epistle  which  we  have  classed  with  James,  and  whose 


1  Spitta,  who  propounds  this  theory  with  great  learning  in 
his  commentary,  is  obliged  to  refer  the  begetting  with  the 
word  of  truth  (1  :  18)  to  the  physical  creation ;  but  this  is 
a  case  of  special  pleading,  the  natural  meaning  of  the  words 
making  them  denote  the  spiritual  begetting,  the  Christian  doc- 
trine of  the  new  birth.  Here  as  in  all  similar  cases,  it  it  is  im- 
peratively necessary  to  follow  the  natural  interpretation. 


JAMES  AND  FIRST  PETER  105 

claim  of  authorship  is  so  nearly  akin  to  it.  1  Peter  ^  is  l  Peter. 
attributed  to  the  only  other  man  who  shares  with 
James  the  honour  of  leading  the  Church  of  the  circum- 
cision. James  is  the  leader  of  the  Church  at  Jerusa- 
lem; Peter  is  the  apostle  to  the  circumcision.  Both 
of  these  positions  are  of  great  consequence,  and  the 
question  of  personal  influence  is  equally  well  balanced 
between  the  two.  As  far  as  we  can  judge,  James  is 
the  more  natural  leader  of  the  conservatism  which 
dominated  the  Church  so  absolutely  at  first;  while 
Peter  had  whatever  distinction  belongs  to  the  man  of 
larger  views,  who  is  susceptible  to  the  influences  about 
him,  but  who  is  specially  open  to  the  changes  in  the 
currents  of  opinion  which  come  from  the  breath  of 
liberty  in  the  air.  He  showed  just  this  quality  in  the 
affair  at  Autioch.  There  he  came  under  the  influence 
of  the  liberty  which-  prevailed  in  the  Church,  showing 
how  susceptible  he  was  on  that  side.  But  when  those 
from  James  came,  he  recanted.  Of  course,  it  was  the 
first  change  which  showed  his  real  position,  the  other 
was  the  effect  of  fear.  But  to  be  the  apostle  of  the  cir- 
cumcision meant  to  be  the  leader  of  a  narrow  and  reac- 
tionary party,  and  this  epistle  is  not  the  production  of 
such  a  leader,  whatever  his  personal  quality  might  be. 
For  the  doctrine  of  the  epistle  is  a  modified  Paulinism.  Pauliuism  of 
It  is  Pauline  entirely  and  without  qualification  in  its  ^^^  epistle. 

1  For  introduction  to  1  Peter  see  the  volume  of  Professor 
Bacon  in  this  series,  and  in  general,  Salmon,  Introduction  to 
the  N.  r.,  433-447  ;  Weiss,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T. ;  Zahn, 
Einleitung  i7i  das  N.  T.,  II,  1-41  ;  Harnack,  Chronologic,  II, 
passim;  Iluthor,  in  the  Meyer  Series;  Beck,  Briefe  Petri; 
llort.  The  First  Epistle  of  Peter;  Iloltzmann,  Art.  "Petrus" 
in  SchenkeVs  Bibel-Lex.  On  the  theology  of  the  epistle  see 
Stevens,  Theology  of  the  N.  T".,  293-311  ;  Beyschlag,  Nexo  Testa- 
ment Theology,  I,  377-419  ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  I, 
204-247  ;  Holtzinann,  JVeutestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  308-318  ; 
Bovon,  Theologie  du  N.  T.,  II,  463-478. 


106 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


universalism.  It  confers  on  the  Gentiles,  to  whom  it 
is  addressed,  the  titles  and  privileges  of  the  chosen 
people.  Its  mystical  conception  of  our  Lord  is  also 
distinctly  Pauline.  That  the  relation  of  Jesus  to  his 
people  is  that  of  an  indwelling  spirit  is  distinctly 
Pauline,  and  that  one  of  the  men  who  had  been  asso- 
ciated with  him  in  the  external  relations  of  his  early 
life  should  come  to  think  of  him  in  that  way  is  a  great 
change.  The  idea  that  this  relation  is  with  the  cruci- 
fied Lord  is  also  derived  from  Paul.  The  early  disci- 
ples explained  the  death  of  our  Lord  so  as  to  get  rid 
of  its  difficulties,  but  they  were  very  far  from  that 
view  which  made  the  crucified  Christ  the  only  Christ 
whom  they  knew,  the  only  Christ  possible.  But,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  one  thing  which  would  enable  us 
to  say  that  the  epistle  is  Pauline  is  lacking.  The  doc- 
trine of  justification  by  faith  is  not  here,  and  is  con- 
trary to  the  doctrine  of  the  epistle.  I  think  we  can 
say  with  confidence  that  the  apostle  to  the  circumci- 
sion who  is  made  known  to  us  by  a  superficial  com- 
parison of  Acts  and  Galatians  is  not  the  author  of  this 
epistle. 

But  this  by  no  means  proves  that  Peter  was  not  its 
author.  Does  not  Peter  appear  in  another  light  than 
that  of  the  apostle  to  the  circumcision?  Certainly 
the  Peter  who  ate  with  the  Gentiles  at  Antioch  was 
another  person  from  the  Peter  of  other  days.  And 
this  should  make  us  hesitate  about  rejecting  alto- 
gether the  story  of  Cornelius  and  of  the  Council  at 
Jerusalem  which  are  given  in  the  Acts.  The  hint  in 
Galatians  ^  is  certainly  capable  of  expansion  into  the 
detailed  story  of  the  Acts.  It  is  the  same  man,  im- 
pressionable on  the  noble  side,  who  appears  in  both. 
The  story  has  too  much  verisimilitude  about  it  to 


1  2 :  12. 


JAMES  AND  FIRST  PETER  107 

be  cast  aside  altogether;  that,  or  something  like  it, 
accounts  for  the  later  Peter,  who  is  certainly  made 
known  to  us  in  the  various  writings  which  give  us  the 
material  for  our  conception  of  him.  And  right  here 
comes  in  the  fact  already  ^  noticed  that  Peter  is  the 
source  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  His  story  told  to  Peter  and 
Mark  is  the  basis  of  their  entire  structure,  and  while  *^®  Gospels, 
the  apologetic  strength  of  the  second  Gospel  is  due  to 
its  neutrality,  there  is  one  thing  that  appears  very 
strongly,  and  that  is,  that  it  is  told  sympathetically. 
Whoever  told  that  story,  can  be  heard  saying  under 
his  breath,  after  some  of  the  parts  that  are  especially 
well  told,  "Is  not  that  great  ?  "  It  is  no  narrow  apos- 
tle to  the  circumcision  who  tells  with  such  zest  the 
story  of  that  great,  free,  broad  life  and  teaching. 
And  this  means  another  thing;  this  original  story 
could  not  have  been  told  by  Peter  in  his  character  of 
the  apostle  to  the  circumcision.  No  man  could  have 
told  that  story  and  remained  playing  that  role,  nor 
could  the  Church  built  on  the  foundation  of  that  story 
have  been  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  as  we  know  it. 
No,  the  teaching  which  made  the  foundation  of  that  The  conver- 
Church  was  primitive  and  Judaistic  —  the  teaching  of  |J*'°  °' 
the  disciples  in  the  early  part  of  Acts.  Then  comes 
in  Paulinism,  with  its  freer  air,  but  with  the  annex  of 
justification  by  faith.  And  third  in  the  great  proces- 
sion comes  in  another  little  group  of  genuinely  apos- 
tolic writings.  James  and  Peter  breathe  the  freer 
air  of  Paulinism,  but  setting  aside,  one  expressly,  and 
the  other  by  an  equally  significant  omission,  that  part 
of  Paulinism  which  is  distinctly  not  a  return  to  the 
Lord,  but  a  departure  nearly  as  great  as  the  substitu- 
tion for  the  law  of  Mosaism  of  the  law  of  freedom  pro- 
claimed by  Christ.     In  other  words,  the  history  of 

1  See  p.  9. 


108 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


this  epoch  is  not  complete,  unless  there  be  introduced 
into  it  the  reappearance  in  historical  narrative  of 
our  Lord.  In  the  crisis  of  the  great  Pauline  debate, 
Peter  must  have  begun  to  tell  the  story  of  Jesus'  life 
and  teaching.  And  in  all  probability  for  this  reason 
—  he  saw  how  exactly  it  fitted  into  the  occasion,  and 
met  its  difficulties.  No  other  voice,  less  authoritative 
than  his,  could  possibly  have  produced  this  balanced 
treatment  of  the  debate  between  Paul  and  the  Jewish 
Church.  For  this  is  precisely  the  significance  of 
these  epistles :  in  them  the  old  debate  over  justifica- 
tion is  finally  adjudicated  by  a  decision  in  favour  of 
neither  side,  but  of  both.  And  the  voice  that  decides 
it  is  no  other  than  that  of  the  reappearing  Christ,  who 
is  brought  to  the  minds  of  both  parties  by  the  story 
that  Peter  rehearses  to  Mark.  I  do  not  say  that  this 
makes  it  absolutely  certain  that  James  and  Peter 
wrote  these  epistles,  but  certainly  that  supposition 
accounts  for  all  the  imdoubted  facts  in  a  way  that 
no  other  does.  On  the  other  hand  without  this  modi- 
fication in  the  attitude  of  the  two  apostles,  the  tradition 
which  ascribes  them  to  James  and  Peter  will  not  stand 
for  a  moment.  The  epistles  are  too  Pauline  to  be 
ascribed  to  distinctly  im-Pauline  men. 

But  whatever  may  be  said  about  the  authorship  of 
these  particular  writings,  their  character  is  undoubted. 
They  are  an  answer  to  Paul  from  the  standpoint  of 
prophetic  Judaism,  whereas  his  contest  was  against 
Pharisaic  Judaism.  They  are  a  defence  of  justifica- 
tion by  works  of  the  law  of  liberty,  which  is  the 
proper  answer  to  the  attempt  to  set  up  justification 
by  the  works  of  Mosaism.  The  appearance  of  this 
reply  is  coincident,  moreover,  with  that  of  the  Synop- 
tic Gospels,  whose  source  is  traced  to  Peter.  Again, 
we  say,  not  to  Peter  the  apostle  of  the  circumcision,  but 
to  an  equally  historical  personage,  the  Peter  of  later 


JAMES  AND  FIRST  PETER  109 

years  —  a  man  reborn  out  of  the  controversies  of  the  The  new 
time,  and  coming  finally  to  adopt  the  freedom  and  ^*^^^^- 
universalism  which  characterised  Paulinism,  though 
led  by  it,  not  to  the  feet  of  Paul,  but  to  the  Master 
himself,  whose  story  he  retold  in  such  a  way  as 
to  put  the  whole  controversy  on  its  proper  footing. 
The  teaching  of  our  Lord  in  the  Synoptics  is  paral- 
leled only  by  these  writings,  and  it  is  significant  that 
the  source  of  the  Synoptic  story  is  the  same  apostle 
to  whom  one  of  these  epistles  is  ascribed.  That  the 
other  epistle  should  be  the  work  of  the  other  leader 
of  the  party  of  the  circumcision,  though  not  certain, 
should  not  seem  strange,  for  it  is  not  improbable  that 
it,  like  1  Peter,  marks  a  change  in  the  whole  attitude  of 
the  party  of  the  circumcision,  of  which  this  change  in 
the  leaders  is  the  sign. 


CHAPTER   II 

THE   TEACHING  OF  THE  EPISTLE  OF  JAMES 

The  key  to  The  key  to  the  teaching  of  this  epistle  is  the  answer 
the  epistle,  ^^q  ^j^q  question,  "  What  shall  a  man  do  with  the  word 
of  truth,  the  possession  of  which  characterises  him 
among  men  ?  "  He  is  described  as  one  who  is  begot- 
ten with  that  word,  and  who  has  the  knowledge  of  di- 
vine things.^  What  is  he  to  do  with  this  knowledge  ? 
He  is  to  be  swift  to  hear  it,  slow  to  speak  it,  i.e.  to  as- 
sume authority  over  men  because  of  it,  and  slow  to  the 
wrath  engendered  by  the  controversies  over  it.^  The 
epistle  is  largely  taken  up  with  discourse  deprecating 
religious  controversy,  to  which  this  exhortation  to  swift- 
ness of  hearing  and  slowness  of  speech  and  wrath  is 
introductory.  The  gentleness  of  the  Beatitudes  (A.  V. 
meekness)  is  the  spirit  with  which  they  are  to  re- 
ceive the  word.^  But  the  writer  passes  immediately 
to  the  ultimate  purpose  and  use  of  the  word.  And 
this  is  doing,  and  not  merely  hearing.  This  carries 
us  back  for  the  first  time  since  the  words  of  our  Lord 
to  his  ultimatum  in  regard  to  the  use  to  be  made  of  his 
words.  They  are  to  be  obeyed,  and  only  he  who 
hears  and  does,  not  he  who  hears  and  believes,  or 
hears  and  confesses,  is  likened  to  the  wise  man  who 
Its  relation     built  his  house  on  the  rock.     Between  Matt.  7 :  21-27 

to  the  teach-  ^nd  Js.  1 :  22-27  is  a  tract  of  fundamental  Christian 

ing  of  Jesus.     ,,.,.,,  .  .    .  , 

debate,  in  which  the  conspicuous  points  are  many  and 

1  1  :  18,  19.      2  1  :  19  ;  cf.  3 :  1-18.      »  1  :  21  ;  cf.  Matt.  5  :  5. 
110 


TEACHING   OF  EPISTLE  OF  JAMES        111 

varied,  but  here  we  are  back  again  on  the  familiar 
ground  occupied  by  our  Lord,  and  really  differentiat- 
ing Christianity  from  all  other  religions.  And  the 
author  goes  on  to  state  that  if  any  one  debates  the  truth 
with  unbridled  tongue,  instead  of  obeying  it,  his  pro- 
fession of  religion  is  a  vain  one.^  This  practice  of  the 
truth,  moreover,  is  what  characterises  true  worship, 
which  consists  in  a  beneficent  and  unspotted  life.^ 
This  faculty  of  going  to  the  roots  of  things  and  dis- 
playing the  unveiled  truth  in  fitting  words  is  possessed 
by  James  next  to  our  Lord  himself,  among  the  New 
Testament  writers. 

But  there  is  another  thing  which  interferes  with  the 
reception  of  the  word.  Besides  nursing  an  evil  spirit 
in  religious  debate,  men  are  tempted  to  mix  up  their 
faith  with  an  equally  incongruous  respect  of  persons, 
to  pay  respect  to  the  rich  in  their  assemblies,  and  to 
neglect  the  poor.  James  sees  in  this  a  violation  of  the 
king  of  commandments,  that  men  shall  love  their 
neighbours  as  themselves,  evidently  because  regard  for 
the  poor  is  essentially  unselfish,  while  regard  for  the 
rich  to  the  exclusion  of  the  poor  is  essentially  selfish.' 
In  this  connection  he  repeats  the  phrase  which  is 
enough  to  confer  the  distinction  of  seer  on  any  teacher 
of  religion,  the  Laio  of  Liberty,  i.e.  a  law  having  in- 
ward, spiritual  enforcement,  not  external.  Paul's  motto 
is  freedom  from  law ;  James's,  the  law  of  freedom.^ 

It  is  evident  that  this  insistence  on  obedience  as  the  james  and 
ultimate  demand  made  on  men  by  the  word  of  God  ^*^^- 
brings  James  into  conflict  with  Paul.  As  we  have 
seen,  the  free  and  large  treatment  of  law,  the  insist- 
ence on  inward  righteousness,  instead  of  outward 
forms,  is  due  to  the  intiuence  of  the  great  apostle.  But 
whether  the  Twelve  ever  reached  this  position  or  not, 

U:20.  2  1:27.  8  2:1-13.  *  2 :  12. 


112  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

they  stopped  there.  A  free  and  large  treatment  of  the 
law,  a  discovery  of  its  principles,  which  enabled  them 
to  set  aside  its  rules  and  forms,  there  is  evidence  in 
these  epistles,  was  learned  within  their  circle  before 
the  end  of  the  New  Testament  period.  But  having 
arrived  there,  they  stopped.  It  would  not  be  simply 
their  Judaism  with  its  tendency  to  magnify  law 
that  would  lead  to  this,  but  their  association  with 
Jesus.  Paul  shows  generally  a  power  to  enter  into  the 
mind  of  Christ  superior  to  the  Twelve,  but  his  idea  of 
a  righteousness  without  works  is  one  which  could  never 
The  position  have  occurred  to  an  immediate  disciple.  Nor  is  it  nec- 
iVelve.  essary  to  debate  the  paragraph,  2 :  14-26,  by  itself. 
The  antecedent  probability  that  the  Twelve  would 
make  a  stand  right  here  is  enough  in  itself  to  decide 
the  question.  Coupled  with  this  is  the  certainty  gath- 
ered from  the  study  of  the  Acts  and  the  Pauline  Epis- 
tles, that  there  was  a  debate  between  the  Twelve  and 
Paul.  That  debate  began  with  a  stand  made  by  Paul 
against  the  demand  that  his  Gentile  converts  should 
conform  to  Jewish  forms,  especially  circumcision,  pre- 
cisely as  we  should  now  insist  on  baptism.  This  de- 
mand was  made,  not  by  a  small  section  of  the  Church, 
but  by  the  whole  Church  at  Jerusalem,  including,  of 
course,  its  leaders.  But  before  Paul  gets  through,  he 
posits  not  only  freedom  from  the  ceremonial  parts  of 
the  law,  but  from  law  itself  as  such.  And  when  this 
word  has  once  been  uttered,  it  is  evident  that  this 
would  be  the  focus  of  that  fight.  All  detached  and 
subsidiary  questions  would  be  abandoned,  and  the 
forces  would  all  gather  right  here.  And  when  we  find 
a  document  belonging  to  that  time  in  which  just  that 
question  is  debated  in  good  set  terms,  it  is  the  very 
foolishness  of  traditionalism  to  deny  the  controversial 
aspect  of  it,  and  to  insist  on  a  uniformity  of  belief  in 
the  first  century,  and,  above  all  things,  that  the  one 


TEACHING  OF  EPISTLE  OF  JAMES        113 

belief  was  the  doctrine  of  Paul,  the  one  dissenter  from 
current  opinion  in  that  time.  Such  attempts  obscure 
the  only  marks  by  which  we  can  find  our  way  through 
the  New  Testament,  and  cripple  our  historical  sense. 
They  substitute  for  the  probabilities,  which  are  the  only 
legitimate  objects  of  our  search,  bare  possibilities,  with 
which  we  have  nothing  to  do. 

Coming  now  to  the  paragraph^  itself,  its  adoption  of 
«the  unique  Pauline  phraseology,  its  statement  of  the 
question  in  the  very  terms  of  the  Pauline  statement, 
its  care  to  make  the  proposition  the  exact  opposite  of 
his,  and  the  selection  of  Paul's  test  case  as  its  own, 
resting  the  case  on  the  palmary  instance  of  Abraham's 
faith,  are  decisive.  That  man  is  justified  by  faith 
without  works  of  law,  and  that  a  man  is  justified  by 
works,  and  not  by  faith  only,  are  contradictory  state- 
ments. All  that  has  ever  been  sho-\vn  to  the  contrary 
amounts  to  this,  that  there  is  possibly  a  middle  ground 
which  was  open  to  the  authors,  but  not  that  they  were 
not  debating  consciously  adverse  positions. 

The  importance  of  this  paragraph  arises  from  its  The  case  of 
presenting  the  case  of  Judaistic  Christianity  vs.  cbrisUanity. 
Paulinism,  not  from  the  standpoint  of  Pharisaism, 
which  emphasizes  the  formal  parts  of  the  law,  but  of 
liberal  Judaism,  which  stands  only  for  the  ethical  con- 
tents of  the  law.  The  importance  of  disentangling  the 
question  from  the  complications  of  Pharisaism,  and  pre- 
senting it  simply  as  a  matter  of  law  or  no  law,  is  evident. 

The  discussion  which  follows  upon  the  dangers  of 
religious  controversy,  which  is  the  real  point  of  the 
paragraph  on  the  evils  of  the  tongue,  becomes  inter- 
esting from  the  example  of  Christian  courtesy  fur- 
nished in  this  debate  on  both  sides.  It  is  enough  to 
say  that  Paul,  who  was  the  party  of  the  first  part,  is 

1 2 : 14-26. 


114  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

the  defender  of  Christian  unity,  putting  it  on  the  true 
ground,  that  differences  of  opinion  among  Christians 
are  ruinous  only  when  they  break  np  the  unity  of  the 
Body  of  Christ,  and  that  Paul  is  himself  a  master  of 
courtesy  in  religious  debate.  And  James  precedes  and 
follows  his  own  discussion  of  the  most  vexed  question 
in  the  first  century  with  the  stoutest  condemnation  of 
acrimony  in  debate,  while  he  is  himself  a  fine  example 
of  the  gentleness  and  impersonality  which  belong  to 
the  discussion  of  high  matters. 

The  denunciation  of  wealth  by  James  is  the  strongest 
in  the  New  Testament,  not  even  excepting  our  Lord's. 
It  is  wealth  as  such  that  is  condemned  by  him,  not  ex- 
ceptional cases  in  which  the  wealth  is  ill-gotten.  He 
takes  the  same  position  as  our  Lord,  who  pronounces  a 
blessing  on  the  poor,  and  a  woe  on  the  rich,  and  who  calls 
riches  unrighteous.  The  words  employed  by  them  are 
not  moderate  and  cautious,  as  about  a  matter  having  so 
many  sides  that  these  qualities  of  moderation  and  cau- 
tion are  demanded,  but  outspoken  and  severe.  And  in 
this  matter  they  are  the  lineal  descendants  of  the 
prophets,  who  make  the  Old  Testament  ring  with  dis- 
course about  wealth  as  essentially  an  oppression.  It 
is  not  the  province  of  a  treatise  like  this  to  defend 
these  positions ;  this  is  not  a  treatise  on  apologetics. 
But  it  is  a  legitimate  part  of  our  work  to  show  what 
are  the  meanings  and  place  of  parts  of  the  teaching  in 
the  whole  body  of  New  Testament  thought.  Great 
wealth  is  plainly  the  result  of  a  conflict,  and  of  the 
advantage  which  one  man  gets  over  another  in  the 
conflict.  Now  it  is  evident,  whatever  may  be  our 
judgment  of  the  conflict  and  its  result,  that  it  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  principle  of  equal  love  between  man 
and  man,  which  is  the  normal  principle  of  the  relation 
of  men  in  the  teaching  of  both  James  and  our  Lord.* 
1  f> :  1-6. 


TEACHING   OF  EPISTLE  OF  JAMES         115 

But  this  statement  is  offset  by  the  exhortation  to  The  poor, 
long-suffering  on  the  part  of  the  poor,  which  breathes 
equally  the  peculiar  spirit  of  the  Gospel.  Indeed,  the 
position  of  Christianity  cannot  be  understood,  unless 
we  consider  that  what  it  objects  to  is  not  so  much  the 
appropriation  of  an  undue  amount  of  this  world's 
goods  by  one  of  its  two  classes,  but  that  the  whole 
policy  is  fraught  with  evil  to  both  classes ;  it  is  utterly 
inconsistent  with  the  love  that  God  has  to  both  alike 
that  he  should  allow  it  to  continue.  The  word  that 
the  writer  employs  to  denote  the  spirit  with  which  the 
poor  should  meet  the  oppression  of  wealth  is  the  same 
word  that  Jesus  employs.  It  means  long-suffering, 
and  it  denotes  by  this  the  mildness,  the  slowness  to 
wrath,  the  patience  in  bearing  injury,  of  which  Jesus 
is  himself  the  supreme  example.^ 

The  designation  of  the  law  as  a  law  of  liberty  is  one  The  law  of 
of  the  clews  that  we  need  to  follow  in  order  to  get  at  liberty, 
the  secret  of  the  teaching  of  this  epistle.  I  have  no 
doubt  that  it  is  chosen  intentionally  to  offset  Paul's 
teaching  of  freedom  from  the  law.  The  writer  prob- 
ably had  in  view  the  apparent  justification  for  that 
Pauline  idea,  viz.  the  feeling  of  bondage  engendered 
by  the  legalism  of  the  Pharisees,  and  the  necessity  of 
supplying  the  place  of  the  Pauline  freedom  with  some- 
thing that  should  be  consistent  Avith  the  requirement 
of  continued  obedience.  This  he  finds  in  the  fact  that 
the  law  of  God  is  not  an  arbitrary  code,  but  has  its 
roots  in  the  reason  of  things  and  in  the  love  of  God. 
And  both  these  elements  of  freedom  he  presents  after 
the  manner  learned  in  the  school  of  Christ.  He  does 
not  argue  them ;  but  all  that  he  enjoins  upon  men  has 
this  breadth  and  freedom  about  it.  Everything  en- 
joined here  belongs  to  the  class  of  ultimate  principles 

1 5:  7-11. 


116 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Its  source. 


The  person 
of  Jesus. 


of  conduct  to  which  Jesus  reduces  the  law.  But  the 
supreme  fact  which  turns  obedience  into  a  matter  of 
liberty  instead  of  restraint,  is  the  graciousness  of  God. 
Men  are  required  to  obey  a  law  of  love ;  and  the  ques- 
tion which  is  always  proper  to  ask  of  a  law  of  freedom, 
Wfiy  is  this  commanded  ?  is  answered  by  the  statement 
that  the  lawgiver  is  himself  supremely  gracious.  God 
is  represented  as  wanting  the  friendship  of  man,  and 
as  desiring  with  a  craving  amounting  to  jealousy  *  the 
spirit  that  he  puts  within  man.  And  throughout  the 
epistle,  with  one  touch  after  another,  God's  spirit  and 
disposition  are  so  described  that  men  are  made  to  feel 
that  the  love  which  he  craves  he  deserves.  If  men 
can  only  get  to  know  him,  love  is  the  free  movement 
of  the  soul,  and  no  constraint.  This  is  to  be  remem- 
bered when  we  speak  of  the  rare  reference  to  our  Lord 
in  the  epistle.  This  freedom  and  breadth  of  its  ethi- 
cal teaching,  which  sums  itself  up  in  the  phrase, 
a  law  of  liberty ;  and  this  presentation  of  God  in  such 
way  that  men  shall  feel  his  graciousness  and  be  drawn 
into  a  spontaneous,  loving  obedience, — has  been  learned 
from  only  one  source.  The  tribute  to  our  Lord  is  not 
much  speech  about  him,  but  the  reflection  of  his  spirit.* 
The  writer's  answer  to  any  question  about  the  per- 
son of  Jesus  has  to  be  inferred.  We  have  to  put 
together  what  is  said  about  regeneration  with  the 
word  of  truth,  about  righteousness  of  works,  and  not 
of  faith  alone,  and  the  designation  of  faith  as  that  in 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Jesus  is  the  object  of  faith ; 
in  man's  attitude  toward  the  word  faith  is  the  first 
thing,  but  it  is  incomplete  without  works  of  obedience. 
Jesus  is  the  one,  therefore,  in  whom  men  are  required 
to  believe,  but  this  faith  has  obedience  to  God  as  its  final 
raison  d^itre.    This  means  that  the  place  of  Jesus  is  con- 


M:5. 


2  1:5,  13,  17,  18,  27  ;  2  :  13  ;  4  :  4-10. 


TEACHING  OF  EPISTLE  OF  JAMES        117 

ceived  by  the  Avriter  as  in  the  kingdom  of  God,  the  one 
whose  whole  being,  word,  and  work  is  such  that  to  be- 
lieve in  him  leads  by  a  straight  path  to  that  obedience  to 
God  which  is  the  idea  of  the  kingdom.  In  other  words, 
he  is  the  Messianic  King  in  just  the  sense  in  which  our 
Lord  himself  conceived  himself  to  be.  It  only  needs  to 
couple  this  finally  with  the  picture  of  the  divine  gra- 
ciousness  drawn  by  the  epistle  to  see  that  the  writer 
conceives  of  our  Lord  as  exhibiting  in  himself  this 
grace  which  is  the  reason  and  inspiration  of  obedience. 

To  sum  up,  the  distinctive  teaching  of  the  Epistle  Summary, 
of  James  is,  that  the  word  of  truth  by  which  we  are 
regenerated  is  to  be  obeyed ;  that  nothing  short  of  obe- 
dience, not  intellectual  acceptance,  or  controversial 
zeal,  not  even  faith  alone,  satisfies  God's  demand  on  us, 
and  the  conditions  of  efficiency  of  that  word.  Further, 
that  the  supreme  command  of  that  word  is  love,  which 
is  the  standard  by  which  all  actions  are  to  be  judged. 
In  the  matter  of  the  Pauline  controversy,  it  declares 
that  the  righteousness  which  God  requires  is  a  right- 
eousness of  works,  and  not  of  faith  alone.  But  these 
works  are  not  those  of  a  law  which  insists  on  circum- 
cision, nor  any  rite  or  form,  but  of  a  law  of  liberty, 
whose  commands  square  always  with  reason  and  con- 
science. God  is  represented  in  it  as  the  author  of 
nothing  evil,  but  of  every  good  and  perfect  gift,  of 
which  the  chief  is  the  begetting  with  the  word  of  truth. 
He  is,  besides,  the  jealous  God  of  the  Decalogue,  who 
marries  his  people  to  himself,  and  has  a  craving  for 
the  spirit  of  man  amounting  even  to  envy.^  This  cen- 
tral thought,  that  the  royal  law  is  the  law  of  love,  is 
developed  into  the  specific  commands  against  respect 
of  persons,  against  a  profession  of  charity  unaccom- 
panied by  its  deeds,  against  the  bitterness  of  religious 

14:5. 


118  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

controversy,  against  the  selfishness  of  wealth,  against 
those  desires  after  the  lower  things  which  engender 
strife,  and  against  impatience  under  wrong.  Christ  is 
the  object  of  that  faith  which  has  obedience  for  its 
result,  and  is,  therefore,  the  inspiration  of  the  new 
life.  He  is  the  Messianic  King  in  the  sense  imparted 
to  the  words  by  our  Lord  himself.  And  God  is  the 
gracious  One  whose  desire  for  man's  good  makes  the 
Messianic  law  a  law  of  liberty. 


CHAPTER   III 
THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  PETER 

The  address  in  the  salutation  of  1  Peter  "  to  the  Readers 
elect  sojourners  of  the  dispersion  in  Pontus,"  and  other  Jj^J^p'jstie  j. 
places,  taken  by  itself,  would  indicate  that  this  epistle  addressed, 
was  addressed  to  Jewish  Christians.    But  the  contrast- 
ing of  them  with  Gentiles^  is  not  what  we   should 
expect  in  that  case ;  Jewish  Christians  would  be  con- 
trasted with  Jews.     And  the  description  of  them  in 
4 : 3,  as  having  passed  their  pre-Christian  life  in  doing 
the  will  of  the  Gentiles,  specifying  the  sins  of  the 
Gentiles  rather  than  of  the  Jews,  is  really  conclusive  on 
the  point.      One  of   the  noticeable  things  about  the 
epistle  therefore  is,  that  it  does  not  argue,  but  assume, 
that  the  titles  and  prerogatives  of  the  chosen  people 
belong  to  the  Gentiles. 

This  address  settles  for  us  the  question  of  the  date,  Date  of  the 
supposing  the  author  to  be  Peter.  Paul's  statement  ^P'***^®- 
in  Gal.  2 :  9,  that  Peter  and  the  rest  of  the  twelve  Avere 
to  confine  themselves  to  the  Jews,  while  he  was  desig- 
nated as  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  would  clearly 
preclude  an  epistle  to  Gentile  Christians  in  Paul's  own 
bailiwick  as  long  as  he  lived.  After  his  death,  this 
movement  of  the  Twelve  into  his  territory  is  quite  pos- 
sible, —  in  fact,  would  be  almost  certain. 

The  motto  which  is  suggested  as  appropriate  for 
this  book  is  "  Prisoners  of  Hope."    The  hope  is  that 

1  2  :  12. 
119 


120 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


of  the  early  Church  in  the  reappearing  of  our  Lord 
within  the  generation  following  his  death ;  the  impris- 
onment is  the  life  of  the  believer  meantime  in  a  hos- 
tile world.  This  hope  was  begotten  in  them  by  the 
resurrection,  and  it  is  in  a  reminiscent  tone  that  the 
writer  speaks  of  the  renascence  of  their  lost  and  be- 
clouded faith,  when  the  brightness  of  the  resurrection 
broke  the  darkness  of  our  Lord's  death,  and  of  the 
way  in  which  the  faith  grew  immediately  into  a  hope 
of  his  reappearing.^  But,  meantime,  they  are  suffer- 
ing the  pains  of  those  who  live  in  a  hostile  world. 
Here,  again,  the  tone  becomes  reminiscent,  as  of  one 
who  not  only  shared  this  fate  of  the  believer,  but  re- 
membered what  our  Lord  had  said  of  these  sufferings. 
We  are  reminded  all  the  way  through  this  epistle  of 
our  Lord's  teaching  of  the  necessity  of  suffering  as  a 
part  of  the  condition  of  following  him.  But  the  writer 
insists  that  it  is  not  the  suffering  that  commends  them, 
but  the  righteousness,  and  the  patience  with  which 
the  suffering  is  borne ;  and  this,  again,  is  an  echo  of 
what  our  Lord  says  about  the  same  matter.  But  the 
writer  dwells  upon  one  conception  of  suffering  which 
comes  from  his  view  of  the  flesh  as  the  seat  of  evil 
appetites  and  desires  in  man :  it  is  a  crucifixion  of 
the  flesh ;  to  suffer  in  the  flesh  is  to  cease  from  sin ; 
and  this  is  made  one  of  the  meanings  of  our  Lord's 
sufferings.^ 

From  both  sides  of  this  condition,  the  present  suf- 
fering, and  the  future  hope,  the  writer  makes  his 
appeal  to  the  readers  for  the  life  of  righteousness. 
It  is  the  only  possible  meaning  of  life  on  both  sides. 
Just  as  the  ordinary  life  is  inexplicable  except  as  a 
pursuit  of  worldly  things,  so  their  life  is  meaningless 
except  as  an  imremitting  pursuit  of  righteousness. 


U :  3,  4. 


2  4:1-5. 


TEACHING  OF  FIRST  PETER  121 

And  this  must  be  no  ordinary  goodness  either,  but  Persecution, 
that  peculiar  excellence  of  self-sacrifice  which  char- 
acterised the  Lord.  The  persecution  will  come  to 
them  anyway  as  followers  of  Christ ;  what  they  need 
to  achieve  is  a  life  which  shall  make  their  persecution 
not  a  part  of  the  punishment  which  the  world  deals 
out  to  evil-doers,  but  of  its  hostility  to  the  higher 
forms  of  righteousness.  There  is  a  contradiction  in 
the  treatment  of  this  subject,  of  which  this  statement 
is  the  only  explanation.  He  says  at  the  same  time 
that  their  suffering  is  on  account  of  righteousness, 
and  that  no  one  will  hurt  them  if  they  are  followers 
of  good,^  This  comes  from  the  view  of  govern- 
ment which  the  early  Church  was  persistent  in  main- 
taining, that  it  is  a  divine  ordinance,  and  is  on  the 
whole  a  conservator  of  the  good  side  of  things  in  the 
community.  But  it  is  only  the  mixed  form  of  good- 
ness which  prevails  in  society,  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  higher  forms  of  goodness  advocated  by 
Christianity  are  rejected  by  the  same  society  which 
condemns  the  more  obvious  forms  of  evil.  On  the 
side  of  hope,  the  appeal  takes  this  obvious  form,  that 
righteousness  is  the  only  condition  of  the  future  glory. 
That  they  obtain  only  as  followers  of  Christ,  and  to  The  con- 
follow  him  means  to  follow  him,  which  is  the  same  reward!* 
apparent  truism  that  our  Lord  makes  use  of  in  this 
connection.^  They  must  be  meek,  humble,  loving, 
deaf  to  the  appeals  of  the  world  and  the  senses,  and 
followers  always  of  the  good.  One  cannot  help  the 
feeling,  that,  while  this  epistle  lacks  the  controversial 
aspect  of  James,  its  insistence  on  righteousness  of  this 
exalted  type  is  intended  to  be  an  antidote  against  the 
well-meant  encouragement  of  some  substitute  for  this 
in  Paul.    Faith  is  taught  here  as  the  means  of  con- 

12:12;  4:3,4;  3:13.  »  Mk.  8:34. 


122 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


nection  between  the  believer  and  Christ,  but  it  is  a 
faith  which  leads  on  to  good  Avorks.  And  this  dis- 
crimination in  a  writing  which  is  elsewhere  so  stamped 
with  Paulinism,  points  to  a  definite  result  of  the  differ- 
ences between  Paul  and  the  Twelve,  of  which  this 
epistle  and  James  are  the  fruits. 

The  death  of  Christ  is  given  the  same  prominence 
in  the  Avork  of  redemption  as  in  the  Pauline  doctrine. 
But  the  effect  is  rescue  from  sin  itself,  and  not  from 
the  penalties  of  sin,  no  hint  being  found  that  it  has 
an  effect  in  reconciling  men  to  God,  other  than  this  of 
removing  the  cause  of  estrangement  in  the  sin  of  men. 
The  blood  of  Christ  is  represented  as  redeeming  them 
from  the  fruitless  way  of  living  inherited  from  their 
fathers.^  He  died  for  us,  leaving  us  an  example  that 
we  should  follow  in  his  footsteps,  the  point  of  his 
example  being  that  he  did  no  sin,  that  he  suffered 
uncomplainingly,  and  that  he  suffered  for  others,  bear- 
ing their  sins.''  Moreover,  his  suffering  in  the  flesh  is 
to  lead  us  into  the  same  mind,  since  he  Avho  suffers  in 
the  flesh  has  ceased  from  sin.'  But  his  resurrection 
also  does  its  part  of  the  saving  work,  begetting  in  us 
a  living  hope,  and  becoming  that  through  Avhich  the 
appeal  of  the  good  conscience^  in  baptism  is  made 
valid.*  There  is  one  aspect  of  this  redemption  Avhich 
is  peculiar  to  this  epistle.  It  is  corporate,  and  not 
merely  individual.  On  Christ  as  the  corner-stone  they 
are  built  into  a  spiritual  temple  and  become  a  royal 


1 1 :  18,  19.  9  2:  21-25.  «  4  : 1-5. 

♦  This  seems  to  be  the  only  valid  translation  of  iirepdrTiixa 
in  this  passage.  It  is  the  appeal  of  the  good  conscience  to 
the  entrance  on  a  new  life  signified  by  baptism.  This  is 
pointed  out  as  the  saving  element  in  baptism.  It  is  not  the 
water,  but  the  purified  conscience,  which  cleanses  the  soul, 
and  it  is  this  to  which  the  soul  appeals. 

6  1:3-5;  3:21,22. 


TEACHING  OF  FIRST  PETER  123 

pricstliood  to  offer  spiritual  sacrifices,  and  to  show  the 
excellence  of  him  who  called  them  out  of  darkness 
into  his  marvellous  light.^  Evidently,  here  it  is  not 
merely  the  individual  connection  with  Christ,  but 
partnership  in  the  people  of  God  as  well,  which  leads 
to  this  reflection  in  themselves  of  the  glory  of  Christ. 

It  is  evident  that  the  view  of  redemption  set  forth  The  new 
in  this  epistle  is  that  of  a  new  life,  and  regeneration  is 
therefore  one  of  its  characteristic  ideas.  The  marked 
thing  about  this  new  life  is  the  Christian  hope,  of 
which  God  is  the  author,  who  begets  it  in  them  by  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ.^  The  incorruptible  seed 
of  this  new  life  is  the  word  of  God,  which  lives  and 
abides  forever,  the  word  of  the  Gospel.'  The  food  of 
this  new  life  is  the  milk  of  the  word.*  Eaith  is  the 
principle  of  this  life,  but  this  faith  is  placed,  not  in 
the  word,  as  might  be  expected,  but  in  the  person  of 
either  God  or  Christ." 

This  conception  of  redemption  as  a  deliverance  from  The  person 
sin,  and  the  implanting  of  a  new  life,  both  of  which  ^^  °"^"  ^^*^ 
have  their  source  in  Christ  as  an  indwelling  power  in 
men,  creates  an  exalted  view  of  our  Lord's  person,  as 
in  the  case  of  Paul.  But  it  does  not  lead  to  any  state- 
ment of  this  exaltation,  as  involving  divine  origin  or 
nature.  All  that  is  said  about  him  concerns  his  office 
and  ministration  to  men,  jind  not  his  person.  He  is 
called  Lord,  but  it  is  in  a  statement  that  God  is  his 
God  and  Father.^  He  is  the  Shepherd  and  Bishop  of 
our  souls ;  he  is  to  be  sanctified  in  our  hearts  as  Lord; 
he  is  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  which  means  that  he 
occupies  the  place  of  power  next  to  God.^  But  it  is  in 
the  statement  that  he  is  the  inward  source  of  our  re- 
demption, creating  in  us  the  new  life,  that  this  epistle 

12:4-12.  2  1:3.  8  1:23-25.  <  2 : 2. 

M:5,  7,  9,  21  ;  1  :8;  2:0,  7.      6  i  :  3.       '  2  :  25  ;  3  :  15,  22. 


124  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

renders  the  most  exalted  homage  to  him.  In  this  re- 
spect, as  in  others,  this  epistle  stands  midway  between 
Paul  and  the  earlier  Jewish  and  apostolic  Christianity. 
The  common  ground  between  this  writer  and  Paid  is 
of  great  importance  in  the  development  of  the  true 
spirit  of  Christianity,  the  difference  between  an  inward 
and  outward  relation  to  Christ  being  capital  and  pri- 
mary in  its  importance.  But  the  combination  of  this 
inward  relation  with  the  statement  of  obedience  and 
righteousness  as  the  object  of  that  relation,  is  the  su- 
preme excellence  of  this  epistle.  It  does  not  ethicise 
and  spiritualise  the  law  after  the  manner  of  our  Lord 
and  of  James,  but  it  joins  hands  with  Paul  in  famil- 
iarising us  with  the  supreme  motives  and  impulses 
that  come  to  us  from  the  cross  of  Christ.  And  it 
insists,  as  our  Lord  does,  and  as  Paul  does  not,  that 
doing  the  things  commanded  us  is  our  life.  , 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  APOCALYPSE 

Of  the  ■writings  belonging  to  the  later  apostolic  The  Apoca- 
teaching,  the  Synoptics,  Peter,  and  James  represent  /aaUne!*^' 
a  qualified  opposition  to  Paul,  accepting  his  universal- 
ism  and  his  doctrine  of  freedom  from  Mosaism,  but 
rejecting  his  statement  of  freedom  from  law  as  such. 
The  Apocalypse,  however,  represents  an  unqualified 
opposition  to  Paul,  which  does  not  exist  among  the 
apostles  themselves,  but  only  among  the  extreme  mem- 
bers of  their  party.  It  is  not  only  extreme  in  its  posi- 
tions, but  violent  in  its  language,  and  its  Jewish 
Messianism  is  of  the  most  pronounced  type.  But 
John,  to  whom  it  has  been  attributed,  was  not  even  a 
leader  in  the  party  of  the  circumcision,  much  less  in 
the  extreme  section  of  that  party,  and  the  idea  that  it 
proceeds  from  the  circle  of  the  Twelve  is  therefore  quite 
improbable.^ 

1  On  authenticity,  date,  etc.,  of  the  Apocalypse  see  Bacon, 
Introduction  to  the  N.  T.  ;  Weiss,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.,  II, 
45-88;  Salmon,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.,  203-244;  Zahn, 
Einleitung  in  das  2V.  T.,  II,  582-626;  Hilgenfeld,  Einleitung  in 
das  N.  T.,  392-452  ;  Holtzmann,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.,  407- 
427  ;  McGiffert,  Apostolic  Age,  632  sq. ;  Weizsacker,  Apostolic 
Age,  II,  161-205;  Pfleiderer,  The  Influence  of  the  Apostle  Paul 
on  Christianity,  124  sq.  ;  Briggs,  The  Messiah  of  the  Apostles, 
284-461 ;  Spitta,  Die  Offenbarung  des  Johannes  untersucht; 
Vischer,  Die  Offenbarung  Johannes  eine  jiidische  Apocalypse 
in  Christlicher  Bearbeitung  ;  H.  Holtzmann,  Jahrbuch  fiir  pro- 
testantische  Theologie,  1891 ;  Volter,  Die  Offenbarung  Johannes 
keine  urspriinglich  jiidische  Apokalypse ;  Milligan,  The  Bevela- 
tion  of  St.  John :  Baird  Lecture,  1886 ;  Plumptre,  The  Epistles 

126 


126  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Is  not  the  In  addition,  the  Apocalypse  and  the  other  Johan- 

Joim.  "*  nean  writings  stand  at  opposite  poles  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament teaching.  Everything  about  the  person  and 
work  of  our  Lord  is  spiritualised  in  the  one,  and  ex- 
ternalised in  the  other.  The  Apocalypse  itself,  as  a  lit- 
erary form,  is  at  the  lowest  grade  of  Hebrew  literature. 
It  emerges,  it  is  true,  sometimes  into  a  certain  grandeur 
of  statement,  but  it  would  not  do  to  turn  its  word- , 
paintings  into  pictures.  The  peculiarly  reflective  and 
philosophical  style  of  the  fourth  Gospel  belongs  to  an 
entirely  different  order  of  mind.  One  feels,  in  reading 
this  book,  the  departure  from  the  spirit  and  thought 
of  Jesus  more  than  in  any  other  New  Testament  writ- 
ing. And  the  supposition  that  it  was  written  by  one 
of  the  three  who  belonged  to  the  inner  circle  of  the 
disciples  seems  difl&cult  to  harmonise  with  both  Jesus' 
influence  over  men  and  his  knowledge  of  them.* 

to  the  Seven  Churches  in  Asia,  Expositor,  1st  Series,  II  and  III ; 
Simcox,  ITie  Bevelation  of  St.  John;  Sabatier,  Les  Origines 
litteraires  et  la  Composition  de  V Apocalypse  de  St.  Jean; 
Bousset,  Die  Offenbarung  Jo.  (Meyer  series) ;  also  Art.  "Reve- 
lation," in  Hastings'  Diet,  of  Bible. 

On  the  teaching  of  the  book  see  Stevens,  Theology  of  the  N. 
T.,  523-563  ;  Beyschlag,  New  Testament  Theology,  II,  347-408  ; 
Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T,  II,  248-283;  Holtzmann,  Neu- 
testamentliche  Theologie,  I,  463-476 ;  Bovon,  Theologie  du  N. 
T.,  II,  498-538. 

1  The  Interpretation  of  the  Beast  helps  us  to  a  general 
position  as  to  the  time  in  which  the  Apocalypse  was  written 
(17:8-11).  The  Beast  properly  is  the  Roman  Empire,  the 
world  kingdom.  It  is  the  incarnation  of  the  spirit  of  the 
dragon,  Satan.  But  the  book  points  out  one  of  the  first  seven 
emperors,  really  one  of  the  first  five,  who  himself  incarnates 
the  spirit  of  the  Beast,  and  who  goes  by  his  name.  This  is 
the  Beast  who  is  pointed  out  in  the  book  in  such  a  way  as 
to  give  us  a  clew  to  the  date  and  meaning  of  the  writing 
(13:3-8,  18).  The  statement  about  him  is  that  he  was  and 
is  not,  having  been  smitten  to  death,  and  is  about  to  come 
up  out  of  the  abyss  and  to  go  away  again  into  perdition.    He 


THE  APOCALYPSE  127 

The  contents  of  the  Apocalypse  may  be  said  in  gen-  Contents, 
eral  to  be :  — 

1.  Letters  to  seven  churches  of  Asia.    1 : 4-3  :  22. 

2.  Visions  preceding  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
6  : 1-11 :  12. 

3.  Destruction  of  Jerusalem.     11 :  13. 

4.  Visions  preceding  destruction  of  Kome.      11 : 
19-17:18. 

6.   Destruction  of  Rome.     18  : 1-24. 
6.   Millennium.    20:1-6. 

is  one  of  the  seven  horns  of  the  Beast,  by  which  are  designated 
the  Roman  emperors  ;  and  of  these  five  are  dead,  the  sixth  is, 
the  seventh  is  to  come  for  a  short  time  and  then  give  place  to 
an  eighth,  who  is  one  of  the  seven,  who  was  and  is  not  and 
returns  to  go  again  into  perdition.  Then  his  number  is  given 
as  666.  Now  if  the  question  were  asked,  Which  of  the  first 
emperors  embodied  the  evil  spirit  of  the  world  kingdom,  its 
opposition  to  the  kingdom  of  God  ?  there  could  be  scarcely 
any  doubt  that  Nero  is  meant.  And  now  that  the  number 
has  been  identified  as  that  of  this  empei'or,  this  probability 
is  confirmed.  The  method  of  this  numbering  is  simple.  The 
letters  are  numbered  1,  2,  3  up  to  ten,  then  by  tens  up  to  one 
hundred,  and  then  by  hundreds  upward.  The  figuring  is 
done  in  this  case  on  the  Hebrew  lettering  of  the  title  and 
name,  —  jnj  iDp,  or  Kaisar  Neron.  This  settles  the  date  of 
the  book,  at  least  within  short  limits.  It  belongs  either  to 
the  reign  of  Galba,  a.d.  68,  or  of  Vespasian,  a.d.  70.  Galba 
was  the  sixth  emperor  de  facto,  but  it  is  contended  that  Ves- 
pasian was  sixth  in  line  de  jure,  Galba,  Otho,  and  Vitellius, 
who  came  in  between,  being  usurpers.  It  really  makes  no 
difference,  as  either  date  antedates  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem, and  that  is  the  deciding  factor  in  this  question.  Domi- 
tian,  to  whose  reign  the  book  has  been  assigned,  is  out  of 
the  question  for  this  reason,  as  this  would  make  the  prophecy 
come  after  the  event,  and  the  misstatement  about  the  event 
of  the  siege  makes  that  impossible.  The  city,  and  especially 
the  temple,  were  entirely  destroyed,  whereas  the  prophecy  is 
that  the  temple  was  saved,  and  only  one-tenth  of  the  city  was 
destroyed,  and  seven  thousand  of  the  population.  This  makes 
a  later  revision  equally  improbable. 


128 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Messianism. 


Messianism 
of  the 
apostles. 


7.  Judgment.  Setting  up  of  kingdom.  Descent 
of  New  Jerusalem.     20 :  7-22 :  21. 

But  its  main  subject  is  the  reappearance,  the  second 
advent,  of  the  Messiah.  And  this  Messianism  is  the 
key  to  its  entire  teaching. 

In  order  to  understand  this,  we  have  to  remember 
the  change  introduced  into  the  doctrine  by  Jesus. 
According  to  the  Jewish  expectation,  the  Messiah 
was  to  be  a  conquering  prince.  His  own  people  were 
to  be  prepared  for  his  coming  by  repentance,  but  other 
nations  were  to  be  subdued  by  the  sword,  with  such 
accompaniment  of  supernaturalism  as  the  military 
situation  required.  But  in  our  Lord's  teaching,  espe- 
cially in  his  passive  acceptance  of  the  fate  awaiting 
any  man  of  revolutionary  ideas,  he  wrought  by  imper- 
ceptible touches  an  entire  change  in  this  programme. 
The  essential  element  in  this  change  is  the  substitu- 
tion of  spiritual  power  for  material  force  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  God's  kingdom.  This  change  is  absolute, 
forbidding  any  attempt  to  help  on  the  spiritual  pro- 
cess with  an  admixture  of  material  force,  to  conquer 
nations  preliminary  to  their  conversion,  or  to  put 
down  heresies  by  any  other  means  than  argument. 

With  our  Lord's  departure  there  came  a  reaction 
to  the  Jewish  idea,  and  all  the  subsequent  teachings 
are  to  be  judged  by  the  degree  of  this  reaction.  In 
general,  we  may  say  that  all  the  later  teaching  limits 
the  spiritual  process  to  the  short  period  of  one  gener- 
ation intervening  between  the  end  of  our  Lord's  min- 
istry and  his  reappearance  on  the  earth.  To  this 
shortening  of  the  period  of  the  spiritual  work,  the 
original  apostles  add  the  limitation  of  it  to  the  chosen 
people.  Paul,  while  adopting  their  limitation  of  time, 
extends  the  spiritual  work  during  that  time  to  the 
Gentiles.  Both  Paul  and  the  Twelve  are  sympathetic 
and  hopeful  in  regard  to  the  ultimate  result.     By 


tht:  apocalypse  129 

whatever  process,  they  expect  the  result  to  be  a  gen- 
eral blessing.  The  gentleness  and  active  pity  of 
Jesus  had  so  far  penetrated  them.  The  Johannean 
literature,  written  as  was  supposed  at  the  end  of  things, 
is  notably  pessimistic,  and  quite  despairs  of  the  world. 
The  Apocalypse  adds  another  variation,  and  the  great- 
est of  them  all.  Persecution  has  engendered  in  the 
writer  a  desire  of  vengeance,  not  simply  of  justice, 
nor  of  forcible  deliverance,  but  of  unpitying  revenge.  Messianism 
And  inasmuch  as  God  is  on  the  side  of  those  perse-  "e'^ngefui. 
cuted,  this  prayer  becomes  prophecy.  The  iron  scep- 
tre and  the  river  of  blood  of  this  book  mark  the  final 
point  of  divergence  from  our  Lord's  Messianic  idea.^ 

But,  meantime,  this  writing  extends  the  spiritual 
process  while  it  lasts.  The  redeemed  include  men 
of  all  kindred  and  tongues,  and  are  innumerable  in 
multitude.^  On  the  other  hand,  their  enemies  include  Universai- 
both  Jews  and  Gentiles.  The  world  power  condemned  Apocalypse, 
is  the  Roman  Empire,  but  Jerusalem  is  called  in  the 
spiritual  language  Sodom  and  Egypt.'  The  difference 
between  them  is  in  the  outcome  of  the  double  catas- 
trophe which  overtakes  them  at  the  end.  The  Gentile 
world  power  is  destroyed  and  cast  into  the  pit;*  but  the 
effect  of  the  judgment  which  overtakes  Jerusalem  and 
destroys  seven  thousand  of  the  population  is  the  repent- 
ance and  salvation  of  the  rest.*  However,  in  the 
redeemed  world  which  succeeds  this  old  earth  after  the 
millennium,  it  is  the  kings  of  all  the  nations  who  bring 
their  friendly  gifts  to  the  New  Jerusalem.^  This 
fulfils  the  Jewish  programme  of  a  world  blessed  and 
dominated  by  the  elect  people,  but  it  is  the  domination 
that  is  emphasised,  as  in  the  programme  of  imperi- 
ali-sm. 

The  Messianic  salvation,  in  itself,  does  not  make 


112:5;  19:15;  14:17-20. 

8  11 :  8. 

6  11:  13, 

2  7  : 9-17. 

*  19 :  20. 

6  21  :  24. 

K 

130 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  process 
of  salvation. 


The  Messi- 
anic Prince 
and  Saviour. 


Tlie  Messi- 
anic Person. 


any  part  of  the  subject  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  hence 
is  slightly  treated.  But  the  incidental  treatment  of 
the  spiritual  process  is  definite,  though  slight.  Men 
are  redeemed  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  but  his  death  is 
not  expiatory,  at  least  the  expiatory  element  does  not 
appear.  The  saints  have  washed  their  robes  in  the 
blood  of  the  Lamb,^  but  the  white  linen  is  the  right- 
eousness of  the  saints.^  This  is  the  combination  of 
the  prophetic  and  the  priestly  conception  found  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  It  is  the  prophetic  result 
of  righteousness  reached  by  the  priestly  means  of 
sacrifice. 

The  theology  which  emphasises  the  death  of  Christ 
in  the  saving  process  does  not  generally  put  his  kingly 
office  in  the  foreground.  It  is  the  peculiarity  of  the 
Apocalypse  that  it  subordinates  the  saving  process  to 
the  kingly  office  of  our  Lord  absolutely,  and  yet  attri- 
butes salvation  to  his  death  alone.  And  it  does  this 
in  such  a  way  as  to  bring  out  the  contrast  of  the  two, 
and  the  paradox  of  their  combination.  The  Lamb 
slain  is  the  constant  title  given  him,  even  in  those 
passages  which  most  exalt  him.  He  reaches  supreme 
honour  through  his  humiliation.  This  is  all  familiar 
enough,  but  it  is  not  so  much  inward  homage  which 
is  constrained,  but  an  obtrusively  external  royalty 
which  becomes  his  reward.  In  the  last  stage  the 
Lamb  is  armed  with  a  sword,  and  slays  like  any  lion 
of  them  all.' 

But  there  is  one  passage  above  all  others  which 
defines  for  us  the  position  of  our  Lord.  It  says  of 
him  who  continues  faithful  to  the  end,  that  the  Lord 
will  give  him  power  over  the  nations  to  rule  them 
with  a  rod  of  iron  and  to  break  them  like  a  potter's 
vessels,  just  as  he  received  the  same  from  his  Father.'' 

17:14.  M4:20;  19:11-21. 

2  19  :  8.  *  2  ;  26,  27. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  131 

If  we  keep  this  in  mind,  we  shall  be  in  position  to 
understand  the  exalted  terms  ascribed  to  him.  He 
wields  a  divine  power  and  receives  a  divine  homage, 
but  both  are  viceregal.  He  is  continually  associated 
with  God  in  a  way  distinct  from  all  the  rest  about  the 
throne.  But  it  is  always  association,  not  identity. 
God  is  still  his  God.'  But  he  is  superhuman,  the  first 
and  the  last,  the  beginning  of  the  creation  of  God, 
and  so  preexistent.^ 

This  part  assigned  to  him  in  creation  and  the  title, 
"  Word  of  God,"  ^  are  probable  indications  of  Alexan- 
drianism,  as  the  doctrine  of  the  place  of  his  death  in 
redemption  is  Pauline.  But  they  occur  in  a  writing 
distinctly  anti-Pauline  and  alien  to  Alexandrianism, 
and  are  therefore  indications  of  composite  authorship. 

In  saying  that  God  is  represented  in  the  Apocalypse  Doctrine  of 
as  a  vengeful  Being,  we  must  remember  at  what  ^'^^• 
stage  of  human  history  that  character  is  assigned  him. 
The  closing  words  of  the  book  predict  our  Lord's 
speedy  coming,  a  return  to  the  world  after  an  era  of 
grace  and  compassion  beginning  with  his  death  for 
men,  and  continued  in  the  preaching  of  his  Gospel 
to  all  nations.  And  here,  at  the  end  of  this,  his  peo- 
ple are  the  victims  of  a  horrible  persecution.  This 
does  not,  perhaps,  remove  the  strangeness  of  the  fact, 
that  one  of  his  own  followers  should  picture  Jesus  as 
ruling  the  nations  with  a  rod  of  iron,  and  taking  dire 
vengeance  on  his  enemies;  but  the  strangeness  is 
removed  when  one  perceives  that  this  is  only  a  strong 
statement  of  the  ordinary  doctrine  that  the  era  of 
grace  ends  with  a  final  judgment,  in  which  God's 
justice  overrules  his  love. 

1  3 :  12.  2  3  :  14.  »  19  :  13. 


PART  V 

THE  NON-JOHANNEAN  WEITINGS  OP  THE 
ALEXANDRIAN  PEEIOD 


CHAPTER  I 

EPHESIANS  AND  COLOSSIANSi 

The  Alexandrian  literature  includes :  (1)  writings  in 
which  a  false  Alexandrianism,  exalting  angels  above 
Jesus,  is  met  with  an  orthodox  Alexandrianism  exalt- 
ing our  Lord  above  all  orders  of  beings :  Ephesians, 
Colossians ;  (2)  epistles  asserting  the  authority  of  the 
Church  against  this  false  Alexandrianism:   the  Pas- 

1  On  authenticity,  date,  etc.,  of  Ephesians  and  Colossians  see 
Bacon,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.;  Godet,  Introduction  to  the 
N.  T.  :  St.  PauVs  Epistles,  414-494  ;  Gloag,  Introduction  to 
the  Pauline  Epistles,  264-336 ;  Hilgenfeld,  Einleitung  in  das 
N.  r.,  659-680;  Zahn,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.,  I,  310-368; 
Weiss,  Introduction  to  the  N.  Z\,  I,  323-358  ;  Lightfoot,  Biblical 
Essays,  375-396 ;  Pfleiderer,  Urchristenthum,  683  sq. ;  Holtz- 
mann,  Kritik  der  Eph.  w.  Colosserhriefe ;  Weizsacker,  Apos- 
tolic Age,  II,  240-245 ;  Macpherson,  The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  ; 
EUicott,  The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians;  Hort,  Prolegomena  to 
the  Romans  and  Ephesians;  von  Soden,  Jahrb.  f.  prot.  Theol. 
1895,  320  sq.;  Schmidt,  Handbuch  iiber  den  Brief  an  die 
Epheser ;  Haupt,  Gefangenschaftsbriefe,  in  Meyer  series  ;  Find- 
lay,  Expositor'' s  Bible  series ;  Abbott,  Int.  Crit.  Comm.  series. 

On  the  doctrines  of  the  epistles  see  Pfleiderer,  Pa^dinism,  II, 
95  sq.,  162  sq.;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T,  II,  75-124; 
Stevens,  Pauline  Theology,  78  sq.,  213  sq. ;  Holtzmann,  Neu- 
testamentliche  Theologie,  II,  225-258 ;  Bovon,  ITieologie  du 
N.  T.,  II,  283-292. 

132 


EPHESIANS  AND  COLOSSIANS  133 

toral  Epistles ;  (3)  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which 
uses  the  Alexandrian  doctrine  of  ideas  and  the  imper- 
fect copies  of  those  ideas  in  earthly  things,  in  defence 
of  Christianity  against  Levitical  Judaism ;  (4)  epistles 
rebuking  sharply  the  principled  licentiousness  of  a 
false  gnosis:  2  Peter,  Jude;  (5)  the  Johannean 
Writings,  which  use  Alexandrianism,  not  for  contro- 
versial purposes,  but  simply  for  the  exaltation  of  our 
Lord.^  Of  these  writings,  Ephesians,  Colossians,  He- 
brews, and  the  Johannean  Writings  are  in  the  front 
rank  of  the  New  Testament  books,  marked  by  distinc- 
tion of  style  and  religious  genius.  They  show  the 
good  side  of  that  which  Paul  deprecated,  the  contact 
of  Christianity  with  the  very  choicest  of  the  Greek 
thought.  For  Alexandrianism  is  a  Jewish  form  of 
Platonism. 

The  situation  in  these  Alexandrian  writings  is  quite  Time  and 
different  from  that  in  the  Pauline  Epistles.    Paul  writes  §few  Testa- 
to  Gentile  churches,  but  his  contention  is  not  against  ment  Aiex- 
these  churches,  but  against  what  he  considers  a  false  *°  "aiism. 
Judaistic  instruction  surreptitiously  imposed  on  them. 
This  false  doctrine  is  drawn  from  Pharisaic  Judaism, 
and  Paul's  contention  against  it  is  the  reaction  of  a 
Pharisee  against  the  bondage  of  that  creed,  which  he 
has  himself  experienced,  and  from  which  he  has  been 
emancipated  by  his  faith  in  Christ.     The  whole  thing 
moves  within  the  lines  of  Rabbinic   and  prophetic 
Judaism,  and  the  scene  is  laid  in  Gentile  churches. 
The  situation  is  abnormal,  for  Palestinian  Judaism  is 
not  the  speech  of  the  Hellenistic  Jews,  and  Paul's 
work  was  carrying  the  controversies  of  that  form  of 
Judaism  into  the  home  of  Hellenism.     The  situation 
could  not  last ;  it  was  bound  to  pass  with  the  disap- 
pearance of  Paul.     He  was  strong  enough  to  keep  it 

1  The  Johannean  Writings,  because  of  their  great  importance, 
will  be  treated  as  Part  VI. 


134  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

within  the  lines  marked  out  by  him  during  his  life ; 
but  with  his  death  Hellenistic  Judaism  came  to  the 
front,  just  because  this  was  its  home,  and  Alexandrian- 
ism  contributed  to  Christianity  the  enrichment  of 
Greek  thought.  For  this  is  the  source  of  the  peculiar 
intellectual  idealism  of  the  writings  of  this  group. 
They  are  the  product  of  Judaism  modified  by  Plato- 
nism,  and  these  mixed  elements  gave  to  Christian 
thought  its  final  New  Testament  form. 

The  epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  Colossians  pur- 
port to  be  written  by  Paul,  and  any  other  authorship 
involves  pseudonymity.  However,  the  critical  study 
of  the  Old  Testament  and  of  the  uncanonical  Jewish 
literature  does  not  give  us  any  strong  impression  of 
the  improbability  of  this.  They  contain  also  Pauline 
traits,  and  references  to  Pauline  personages  and  events. 
The  practical  parts  are  in  the  Pauline  manner.  But 
the  un-Pauline  doctrinal  parts  and  the  Pauline  prac- 
tical matter  suggest  composite  authorship,  a  thing 
by  no  means  unique  in  Jewish  literature.  In  fact, 
the  difficulty  that  either  side  feels  in  pronouncing 
positively  for  or  against  the  Pauline  authorship  is 
best  met  by  this  assumption  of  composite  authorship.^ 

1  The  difficulty,  then,  is  with  the  doctrinal  parts  of  the 
epistles.  Here  the  trouble  is,  first,  with  the  style.  These 
long,  breathless  sentences,  —  in  which  participles,  conjunc- 
tions, infinitives,  relative  and  prepositional  clauses  follow  each 
other  endlessly,  —  are  not  in  the  Pauline  style.  One  of  these 
(Eph.  1 :  3-14)  contains  twelve  verses,  and  this  is  followed 
immediately  by  one  of  nine  and  another  of  ten  verses ;  whereas 
Paul's  style  is  marked  by  short  sentences,  distinct,  but  logi- 
cally connected.  Another  feature  of  the  style,  even  more 
strongly  marked  and  more  incongruous,  is  the  absence  of 
clear  statement  of  the  controversial  matter,  and  the  substi- 
tution of  mere  hints.  In  Romans  and  Galatians  the  disputed 
points  are  stated,  and  then  argued  point  by  point,  so  that  the 
whole  matter  is  plain  from  the  start.  But  in  Ephesians  and 
Colossians  one  has  to  look  long  before  one  comes  to  the  mat- 


EPBESIANS  AND  COLOSSIANS  135 

In  both  of  these  epistles,  the  central  thought  is  the 
exaltation  of  our  Lord.     In  Colossians  it  is  used  con- 

ter  in  controversy,  and  even  then  it  is  stated  so  vaguely  that 
it  is  only  by  an  acquaintance  with  outside  literature  that  one 
learns  the  subject.  The  second  difficulty  is  with  the  subject- 
matter  itself,  which  is  a  Jewish  form  of  Gnosticism.  This 
difficulty  is  twofold  :  first,  with  the  growth  of  this  philosophy 
in  these  infant  churches  and  among  an  uncultivated  people ; 
and,  secondly,  with  the  mastery  of  the  whole  subject  by  Paul. 
These  churches  had  been  founded  only  some  seven  years,  and, 
like  the  rest  of  the  early  churches,  were  probably  recruited 
from  the  poor  and  uncultivated  classes,  Uttle  given  to  specu- 
lation. But  the  difficulty  with  Paul  was  equally  great,  lie 
was,  from  his  early  training  and  from  the  evidence  of  his 
earlier  epistles,  unacquainted  with  Alexandrianism.  He  was, 
according  to  his  own  account,  a  Pharisee  with  a  Rabbinical 
training ;  and  there  is  good  reason  to  suppose  that  the  philos- 
ophy which  he  encountered  in  Corinth  was  Alexandrianism, 
and  there  he  meets  it  merely  as  philosophy,  which  he  rejects 
as  alien  to  Christianity,  whether  it  be  one  philosophy  or  an- 
other (Gal.  1 :  14 ;  1  Cor.  1-4).  The  heresy  against  which  he 
contends  in  this  passage  from  Corinthians  is  the  attempt  to 
state  Christianity  in  the  terms  of  a  secular  philosophy ;  and 
the  only  philosophy  with  which  either  Judaism  or  Christianity 
became  so  entangled  in  this  early  period  was  that  form  of  Plato- 
nism  which  Philo  had  transplanted  into  Jewish  soil,  and  which 
went  by  the  name  of  Alexandrianism.  And  in  the  other  pas- 
sage, from  Galatians,  the  strict  adherence  to  traditions  is  the 
mark  of  Pharisaism,  which  is  incompatible  with  PhUonism. 
Whereas,  in  these  epistles,  the  writer  treats  this  philosophy, 
not  ab  extra,  but  from  the  inside  view  of  an  expert,  opposing 
to  a  false  Alexandrianism,  which  depreciates  Christ,  the  true 
Platonism,  which  exalts  Christ  to  a  place  by  himself  and 
enhances  his  glory.  Only  one  familiarised  with  it  in  all  its 
aspects  could  thus  meet  this  insidious  attack.  But  the  point 
is  not  only  that  the  true  Paul  could  not  meet  this  incursion 
on  its  own  ground,  but  that  he  would  not.  He  was  averse  to 
the  whole  method.  It  is  probable  that  the  whole  subject  of 
Gnosticism,  with  the  wi'itiugs  which  deal  with  it,  belongs  to 
the  otherwise  obscure  region  which  falls  in  the  gap  between 
Paul  and  the  Johannean  Writings. 


136 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  exalta- 
tion of 
Jesas. 


Alexan- 
drianism. 


The  central 
element  in 
Alexan- 
drianism. 


troversially,  opposing  to  the  gnostic  idea,  which  sup- 
plements the  work  of  Christ  with  that  of  angels,  the 
exalted  place  of  our  Lord  himself,  who  reigns  not  only- 
over  worldly,  but  over  heavenly  beings ;  liot  only  over 
men,  but  angels.  In  Ephesians,  on  the  other  hand,  it 
is  used  positively  and  constructively,  the  exaltation 
of  Jesus  being  affirmed  in  order  that  men  may  know 
what  it  means  to  be  called  into  his  fellowship,  and 
what  is  the  significance  of  his  headship  over  the 
Church.  Both  the  individual  in  fellowship  with  him 
and  the  Church  shine  with  its  reflected  glory.  It  is 
the  controversy  evidently  which  furnishes  the  occa- 
sion for  this  advance  in  doctrine,  the  other  applicar 
tion  of  it  being  evidently  later  and  secondary.  This 
makes  Ephesians  follow  Colossians. 

Now,  it  is  the  Alexandrian  philosophy  which  is  at 
the  root  of  both  the  heresy  and  its  refutation.  And 
it  is  necessary  therefore  to  understand  this,  in  order 
to  comprehend  the  matters  discussed  in  these  epistles, 
and  not  only  to  understand  these  writings,  but  all  the 
succeeding  development  of  the  thought  of  the  Church. 
This  philosophy  is  not  the  source  of  its  faith,  but  it  is 
the  form  in  which  its  gnosis  is  cast.  From  this  time 
on,  the  persuasion  which  rules  Christian  thought  is 
that  faith  is  only  a  rudimentary  act,  from  which  it  is 
necessary  to  proceed  to  the  fuller  gnosis,  or  knowl- 
edge. Knowledge,  moreover,  is  not  only  a  more  defi- 
nite mental  attitude  toward  the  same  matters,  but  it 
is  an  advance  into  realms  not  included  in  faith.  In 
this  earliest  form  of  it,  it  goes  on  from  the  place 
and  work  of  Christ  in  redemption  to  his  position  in 
creation. 

The  starting-point  in  Alexandrianism  is  the  duality 
of  the  universe,  the  essential  opposition  of  matter  and 
spirit,  and  the  separation  of  the  spiritual  God  from  his 
material  universe.     It  might  be  supposed  that  the  idea 


EPHESIANS  AND  COLOSSIANS  137 

of  mediation  and  of  the  place  of  the  Logos  in  this  me- 
diation was  used  without  going  back  into  this  dualism. 
But  this  dualism  appears  in  the  ascetic  observances 
which  make  a  part  of  the  heresy  attacked,  and  also  in 
the  spiritual  substitutes  which  the  writer  proposes  for 
them.  This  gulf  is  bridged  by  the  Platonic  ideas,  or 
images  of  things  in  the  divine  mind.  At  the  root  of 
all  orders  of  being,  prior  to  them  all,  and  existing  from 
eternity,  are  the  conceptions  of  them  in  the  mind  of 
God.  Back  of  all  trees,  animals,  and  men,  is  the  image 
of  the  oak  or  the  pine,  the  horse,  the  man,  in  the  Crea- 
tor. And  these  images  are  not  simply  thoughts,  as  in 
men,  but  are  objectified,  obtaining  in  one  sense  an 
existence  separate  from  God,  so  that  he  can  contem- 
plate them  not  simply  as  subject,  but  as  object.  The 
idea  of  a  horse  becomes  the  ideal  horse,  and  in  this 
form  becomes  an  agent  in  the  creation  of  actual  horses. 
This  key  to  the  whole  system  must  not  be  forgotten. 
Without  this  intervention  of  ideas  which  have  become 
objects,  and  are  possessed  of  creative  power,  God  would 
be  unable  to  bridge  the  gulf  between  himself  and  the 
material  world.  These  ideas  of  Plato  become  in  the 
Alexandrian  philosophy  angels. 

But  Alexandrianism  does  not  reach  its  final  thought  The  Alexan- 
in  these  minor  instruments  of  creation.  There  is  in  ^^^^°^  Logos. 
God  not  only  this  multitude  of  ideas,  but  there  is  his 
one  idea  of  the  universe  as  a  whole,  the  Logos,  the 
creative  Word  or  Son  of  God.  And  the  difficulty  with 
the  Jewish  gnosis  which  we  find  attacked  in  the  New 
Testament  is  that  it  appropriates  just  the  form  of  this 
philosophy  which  furnishes  its  adherents  with  a  sup- 
plement to  their  Christian  faith.  This  faith  embraces 
redemption  through  Christ,  but  no  cosmogony,  or  phi- 
losophy of  the  universe,  no  mediating  generative  power. 
This  lack  Jewish  Gnosticism  supplements  by  intro- 
ducing the  angels  of  Alexandrianism.     Against  this 


138  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

Paul,  who  was  a  Palestinian  Jew,  and  not  an  Alexan- 
drian tinctured  with  its  dualism,  would  have  set  up 
the  God  of  the  Jews,  who  creates  directly,  not  needing 
any  mediation.  But  these  epistles,  written  by  an 
Alexandrian  Jew,  find  the  answer  within  Alexan- 
drianism,  seeing  in  Jesus  the  Alexandrian  Logos,  who 
is  the  medium  of  creation,  to  whom  all  others  are  sub- 
ordinated. He  does  not  need  to  be  supplemented 
therefore,  but  all  fulness  dwells  in  him.^  Nor  do  his 
followers  need  anything  to  supplement  him,  to  do  for 
them  anything  that  he  does  not  do,  for  they  are  com- 
plete in  him.''  There  is  no  philosophy  even  to  be 
The  work  of  sought  elsewhere,  since  in  him  are  hid  all  the  treas- 

Clirist 

ures  of  wisdom  and  knowledge,  not  simply  of  faith.^ 
There  is  no  divine  power  outside  of  him,  for  in  him 
dwells  all  the  fulness  of  the  Godhead  bodily.*  There 
is  no  power  exalted  above  him,  for  he  is  the  head  of 
the  heavenly  hierarchies.®  He  is  the  reconciler,  not 
only  of  earthly  things,  but  of  heavenly.®  These 
heavenly  beings  of  Alexandrianism  are  ranged  in  tiers 
•  or  circles,  reaching  up  to  heaven  and  down  to  the 
lower  air  next  to  the  world,  and  those  belonging  to 
this  lower  air  are  seduced  by  the  attractions  of  the 
world,  and  are  drawn  into  human  forms  and  pleasures. 
They  are  reconciled  in  Christ  therefore,  and  he  tri- 
umphs over  them.''  This  gnosis  not  only  supplements 
Christ  with  angels,  it  supplements  faith  in  him  with 
observances  which  have  familiar  Jewish  and  Christian 
names,  but  new  aspects  and  meanings.  Circumcision 
and  abstinences  and  baptism  are  mortifications  of  the 
flesh,  which  has  in  it  the  inherent  evil  of  matter.  But 
Christ  put  an  end  to  all  these  rudimentary  things  of 
the  world,  making  the  faith  in  himself  to  include  in 
itself  whatever  of  spiritual  meaning  these  contain.* 

1  Col.  1:19.       8  Col.  2:3.      6Col.  2:10.       '  Col.  2  :  15. 

2  Col.  2  :  10.      *  Col.  2:9.      6  Col.  1 :  20.       8  Col.  2  :  20-23. 


EPITE8IAN8  AND  COLOSSIANS 


139 


Ephesians  has  the  controversial  purpose  in  subordi- 
nation. Instead  of  that,  it  seeks  to  secure  the  unity 
of  the  Church,  and  especially  of  Jews  and  Gentiles 
within  the  Church,  on  the  basis  of  the  fulness  in 
Christ,  who  sums  up  all  things  in  himself  as  the  cos- 
mical  principle.  It  is  on  this  exalted  ground  that  it 
places  this  Christian  unity.  God  had  this  secret  pur- 
pose from  the  beginning,  to  sum  up  all  things  in  Christ, 
both  Jews  first,  and  then  Gentiles,  both  earthly  things 
and  heavenly.^  He  is  given  headship  over  the  heavenly 
hierarchies,  and  all  things  are  made  subject  to  him  in 
the  interest  of  the  one  Church,  which  is  his  body, 
filled  by  him  who  fills  all  things.^  He  is  the  peace  of 
Jews  and  Gentiles,  having  broken  down  the  wall  of 
partition  between  them,  the  law  which  he  describes  as 
consisting  of  commands  in  fixed  decrees.  The  Gentiles 
are  built  in  with  the  Jews  upon  the  one  foundation  of 
Christ  and  the  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  himself  being 
the  chief  corner-stone.'  This  unity  of  the  Spirit  he 
exliorts  them  to  keep  in  the  bond  of  peace,  as  members 
of  the  one  body,  inspired  by  the  one  Spirit,  and  pro- 
fessing the  one  Lord,  the  one  faith,  and  the  one  bap- 
tism.* The  Christ  who  ascended  far  above  all  the 
heavens,  that  he  might  fill  all  things,  gave  them  apos- 
tles, preachers,  evangelists,  pastors,  and  teachers,  for 
the  building  of  the  body  of  Christ,  that  it  may  attain 
to  his  completeness,  and  the  Christian  man  become 
the  complete  man.^ 

It  will  be  seen  that  this  statement  carries  back  the 
idea  of  mediation  between  God  and  men  from  the 
work  of  redemption  to  the  work  of  creation.  This  is 
one  of  the  chief  features  that  distinguish  this  Alex- 
andrian doctrine  from  everything  that  precedes  it,  and 
its  effect  on  the  doctrine  of  both  God  and  Christ  is 


1  Eph.  1 :  8-14. 
a  Eph.  1 :  21-23. 


Eph.  2 :  14-22. 
Eph.  4  : 3-6. 


6  Eph.  4  :  9-lG. 


140  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

very  great.  In  fact,  if  we  want  to  put  these  epistles 
in  their  exact  place,  we  must  recognise  that  they  are 
the  next  step  in  the  development  of  Christian  doctrine 
after  the  Pauline  period.  They  presuppose  Paulinism, 
retaining  many  of  its  ideas,  and  not  by  any  means 
going  back  to  the  simpler  doctrine  of  the  Twelve, 
nor  to  the  recorded  teachings  of  Jesus.  But  these 
writings  are  a  restatement  of  the  Pauline  themes 
in  the  terms  of  Alexandrianism.  Freedom  from  the 
law  is  proclaimed,  but  not  on  thg  ground  of  its  being 
out  of  reach,  unattainable  by  weak  men,  but  on  the 
ground  of  its  attempting  to  attain  victory  over  the 
flesh  by  denying  to  men  the  reasonable  uses  of 
the  body,  instead  of  by  the  crucifixion  of  its  evil 
lusts.  The  weakness  of  the  flesh  is  simply  here  a 
part  of  the  general  evil  of  matter.  The  Jewish  ordi- 
nances of  circumcision,  of  clean  and  unclean,  of  holy 
days,  and  the  like,  are  not  so  much  abolished  as  real- 
ised in  the  substance,  the  realities  of  Christianity,  of 
which  they  are  only  the  shadow.  This  is  more  fully 
stated  in  Hebrews,  where  this  part  of  Alexandrianism 
is  drawn  out  into  definite  statements.  According  to 
that  philosophy,  the  individual  copies  of  the  divine 
ideas  are  always  imperfect,  and  in  the  relation  of 
Judaism  to  Christianity  the  former  is  the  imperfect 
copy,  and  Christianity  is  the  perfect  idea.  Hence  the 
ordinances  of  Judaism  are  only  shadows  of  the  sub- 
stance, and  are  replaced  by  the  Christian  realities. 
But  the  great  difference  in  the  thought  is  not  so  much 
in  these  details,  as  in  the  general  idea,  which  is,  that 
in  the  Logos,  and  not  in  any  individual  members  of 
the  cosmos,  whether  those  members  belonged  to  the 
earthly  sphere,  or  to  the  heavenly  hierarchy  of  the 
divine  ideas  themselves,  whether  to  men  or  to  angels, 
is  to  be  found  the  key  to  the  divine  purpose.  The 
divine  word,  or  thought,  not  of  individual  things,  but 


EPHESIANS  AND  C0L0SSIAN8  141 

of  the  universe,  is  unifying,  bringing  all  scattered  and 
opposed  things  together.  The  oppositions  themselves 
come  from  the  place  of  men  in  a  great  >yorld  scheme, 
including  the  heavenly  hierarchies,  and  their  struggle 
is  not  with  flesh  and  blood,  not  with  anything  in  the 
man  himself,  but  with  the  various  orders  of  the  heav- 
enly beings,  among  whom  there  is  a  discord,  of  which 
the  discord  here  is  only  a  reproduction.^  The  salvation 
of  men,  therefore,  is  included  in  the  carrying  out  of 
this  original  Logos  idea,  the  summing  up  of  all  things 
in  Christ,  and  through  this  union  bringing  to  men 
whatever  good  they  need. 

Ephesians,  therefore,  emphasises  the  church  idea.  The  Church 
not  individual  salvation.  The  eternal  purpose  of  God,  gianf.''^" 
hidden  before,  but  manifested  now,  is  through  the 
Church  to  make  known  to  the  heavenly  hierarchies 
the  manifold  wisdom  of  God.^  The  Church  takes  the 
place  of  the  nation,  being  larger  in  its  idea,  including 
in  itself  all  nations.  But  the  collective  idea  is  mani- 
fest in  the  one  as  in  the  other ;  it  is  the  purpose  of 
the  divine  idea  to  unify  men  that  is  emphasised;  —  to 
bring  together  divided  races,  opinions,  and  interests, 
and  find  a  potent  and  sufficient  bond  of  union  in 
Christ,  the  great  reconciler. 

And  finally,  one  object  of  these  epistles  is  to  depre- 
ciate all  other  mediators  but  Christ.  Those  specially 
contrasted  with  him  are  the  angels.  But  he  is  the 
reconciler  of  them  too,  exalted  far  above  them,  leading 
in  triumph  those  who  set  themselves  against  him,  and 
it  is  through  the  Church  that  God  makes  known  to 
the  heavenly  hierarchies  his  wisdom,  not  through  the 
hierarchies  to  the  Church. 

1  Eph.  6  :  12  ;  Col.  1 :  20  ;  2  :  15.  2  Eph.  3:9,  10. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES  i 

The  style  of  ^^  *^®  Pastoral  Epistles,  Paul,  supposing  him  to  be 
the  Pastoral  the  author,  develops  a  third  manner,  still  further 
pis  es.  removed  from  that  of  the  Paid  of  the  great  epistles. 
In  Ephesians  and  Colossians,  he  is  still  an  argumenta- 
tive or  intuitive  person,  reasoning  things  out  to  logical 
conclusions,  or  seeing  them  intuitively.  To  be  sure, 
he  is  a  Hellenist,  which  the  earlier  Paul  with  his 
Palestinian  training  never  was;  but  all  the  more 
because  he  is  addicted  to  philosophising  does  he  use 
both  argument  and  intuition.  But  the  Paul  of  the 
Pastoral  Epistles  is  a  being  who  does  not  reason  after 
either  the  Jewish  or  the  Hellenistic  fashion,  but  in- 

1  On  authenticity,  date,  etc.,  in  the  Pastorals  see  Bacon,  Intro- 
duction to  the  N.  T. ;  Weiss,  Introd.  to  the  N.  T.,  1, 374-420  ;  Die 
Briefe  P.  an.  Tim.  u.  Tit.  (Meyer  series)  ;  Am.  Jour.  Theol, 
1897,  392  sq. ;  Godet,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T. :  St.  FauVs 
Epistles,  529-611 ;  Gloag,  Introduction  to  the  Pauline  Epistles, 
369-436  ;  Zahn,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.,l,  398-489  ;  Holtzmann, 
Einleitnng  in  das  N.  T.,  272-292  ;  Hilgenfeld,  Einleitung  in  das 
JV.  T.,  744-765;  Salmon,  Introd.  to  the  N.  T,  397-413  ;  Light- 
foot,  Biblical  Essays,  397-418  ;  "Wiesinger,  latid  II  Timothy  and 
Titus;  Findlay,  Essay  appended  to  translation  of  Sabatier's 
VApotre  Paid ;  Stevens,  Paxdine  Theology,  83  sq.  ;  McGiffert, 
The  Apostolic  Age,  398  sq.;  Holtzmann,  Pastoralbriefe ; 
Lemme,  Das  echte  Ermahnungschreiben  des  Apostels  Paulus 
an  Timothens;  Hesse,  Die  Entstehung  der  neutestamentlichen 
Hirtenbriefe. 

On  the  doctrines  of  the  epistles  see  Beyschlag,  New  Testa- 
ment Theology,  II,  501-517 ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T,  II, 
125-149 ;  Holtzmann,  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  259- 
281 ;  Bovon,  Theologie  du  N.  T,  II,  353-385. 

142 


THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES  14S 

trenches  himself  in  authority  after  the  ecclesiastical 
sort.  He  has  a  fixed  type  of  teaching,  a  standard  to 
which  he  brings  everything  for  weighing  and  test. 
There  are  various  names  for  this ;  such  as  healthful  doc- 
trine/ healthful  words/  doctrine  according  to  godli- 
ness/ the  pattern  of  healthful  words/  the  faithful  word 
according  to  the  teaching/  the  good  deposit.^  More- 
over, the  authority  invoked  is  that  of  the  Church, 
which  is  styled  the  pillar  and  foundation  of  the  truth.' 
And  not  only  is  the  Church  given  this  position,  but  the 
ecclesiastical  method  of  preserving  the  truth  is  pointed 
out.  It  is  a  deposit  to  be  guarded,  and  to  be  com- 
mitted to  faithful  men  who  shall  be  able  to  teach 
others.^  Moreover,  we  have  here  the  first  of  those  Beginning 
short,  compressed  statements  in  which  the  Church  **^  creeds, 
embodied  the  faith  for  this  purpose,  the  first  creed 
statements  of  the  Church.  These  are  already  in  the 
shape  which  later  became  fixed,  embodying  those  fun- 
damental facts  in  our  Lord's  life  which  the  Church 
seized  upon  as  the  points  of  departure,  finger-posts  in 
its  teaching.  In  1  Tim.  3 :  16,  it  breaks  abruptly  into 
such  a  statement  in  a  way  possible  only  to  a  quota- 
tion. "He  who  was  manifest  in  the  flesh,  seen  of 
angels,  preached  among  the  nations,  believed  on  in  the 
world,  received  up  into  glory."  In  2  Tim.  2:8,  it 
reads,  "  Remember  Jesus  Christ,  risen  from  the  dead, 
of  the  seed  of  David  according  to  my  Gospel."  ^ 

1  1  Tim.  1 :  10  ;  Tit.  1 :  9  ;  2 : 1 ;  2  Tim.  4  :  3. 

2  1  Tim.  6:3.     »  i  Tim.  6:3.      *  2  Tim.  1 :  13.      6  Tit.  1 :  9. 
«  2  Tim.  1  :  14.  M  Tim.  3  :  15.  8  2  Tim.  1 :  2,  14. 

•  Now  here  is  a  situation  worth  studying  as  a  specimen  of  the 
large,  obvious  marks  by  which  to  measure  a  Biblical  writing  and 
place  it.  Think  of  the  situation  at  the  close  of  Paul's  life.  He 
was  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  and  in  that  office  he  had  founded 
churches  in  the  principal  cities  of  Asia  and  Greece,  besides 
assuming  practical  oversight  of  Kome.  But  these  were  infant 
churches,  drawn  from  the  comparatively  unlearned  classes,  and 


144 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  hereti- 
cal occasions 
of  the 
Pastoral 
Epistles. 


In    general,   these    epistles    are    directed   against 
the  same   Jewish   Gnosticism  which  is   attacked  in 

without  the  background  of  Jewish  inheritance  and  training 
which  aloue  furnishes  the  teaching  class  in  the  primitive  Church. 
Everything  belonging  to  the  understanding  of  Christianity  had 
to  be  brought  in  from  the  outside.  And  the  situation  was  com- 
plicated by  the  fact  that  Paul  had  brought  to  them,  not  the 
authoritative  type  of  Christian  doctrine  held  by  tlie  Church  at 
Jerusalem,  but  what  was  confessedly  an  innovation,  which  was 
tolerated,  but  not  encouraged  by  the  original  disciples  of  our 
Lord.  The  situation  was  the  same  as  if  an  English  or  American 
missionary  should  plant  churches  in  India,  which  would  have 
to  be  recruited  from  the  poorer  classes,  and  should  put  upon 
Christianity  a  new  construction,  striking  for  its  novelty  and  for 
the  power  of  its  presentation,  and  commended  by  the  zeal  and 
success  of  the  missionary,  but  which  made  no  impression  ex- 
cept that  of  surprise  and  doubt  upon  the  Church  at  home.  Then 
imagine  him  delivering  a  closing  charge  to  these  churches,  in 
which  the  dominant  note  is  the  authority  of  the  Church  !  The 
difference  in  the  situation  is  that  Paul,  being  the  one  founder  of 
the  Gentile  churches,  had  been  able  by  that  means  to  put  his 
teaching  on  the  same  level  as  that  of  the  Jewish  Church.  Gen- 
tile Christianity  stood  over  against  Jewish  Christianity,  and  he 
had  stamped  his  teaching  on  this  one  of  the  two  great  divisions 
of  the  Christian  world.  But  this  division  of  the  Church  into 
two  camps,  with  differing  opinions,  is  not  the  mark  of  that 
Catholic  Church  which  teaches  with  authority.  We  have  not 
here  the  marks  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  either  the  unity  or 
authority  of  its  teaching.  It  was  not  ready  yet  to  formulate  its 
teaching,  nor  to  give  it  the  stamp  of  authority.  And  yet  the 
Catholic  Church,  the  Church  teaching  with  authority,  is  the 
only  home  of  these  epistles,  for  it  furnishes  the  situation  that 
makes  them  possible.  In  them  the  Church  is  the  pillar  and 
foundation  of  the  truth,  and  the  pattern  of  healthful  words  has 
already  been  furnished  for  its  utterance.  Such  a  state  of  things 
is  produced  only  by  a  compromise,  and  above  all  things  Paul 
was  no  compromiser.  The  attitude  of  these  epistles  is  also  very 
different  from  that  of  Ephesians  and  Colossians.  The  latter  set 
over  against  the  false  philosophy  of  Gnosticism  the  true  Alexan- 
drianism,  with  its  Logos  doctrine.  The  Pastoral  Epistles  depre- 
cate all  philosophy,  and  put  over  against  it  these  simplest  of  all 
confessions,  the  earliest  creeds  of  the  Church, 


THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES  145 

Ephesians  and  Colossians.  This  led  to  asceticism  in 
the  matter  of  the  marriage  relation,  and  of  meats.^  It 
produced  also  a  belief  that  the  resurrection  was  past 
already,  by  which  is  meant  without  doubt  a  spiritual 
resurrection,  inasmuch  as  Gnostic  dualism  precludes 
bodily  resurrection.^  By  a  singular  turn  also,  its  ascet- 
icism was  offset  by  a  principled  licentiousness,  probably 
coming  from  the  idea  that  bodily  indulgences  do  not 
affect  the  spirit.^  But  they  deal  not  only  with  these 
offshoots  of  the  system,  but  with  Gnosticism  itself,  Gnosticism, 
which  is  a  method  of  explaining  this  imperfect  world, 
and  its  relation  to  the  perfect  God.  God  comes  into 
manifestation  and  creative  activity  only  through  the  » 
mediation  of  a  progressive  series  of  powers  called 
"aeons,"  which  steadily  degenerate  as  they  become 
separated  from  the  original  source.  The  discredited 
genealogies  of  1  Tim.  1 : 4,  Tit.  3  :  9,  are  the  registers, 
so  to  speak,  of  these  successive  emanations,  by  which 
seon  succeeds  aeon.  And  the  source  of  them  all,  the 
ocean  of  the  Divine  Being  from  which  they  spring,  is 
the  TrX'^poifjuL. 

Then  there  is  a  false  legalism,  which  evidently  con-  False 
sists  in  zeal  for  those  parts  of  the  law  which  fall  in  legalism, 
with   the  purposes  of  the  dualistic  philosophy  which 
is  at  the  root  of  Gnosticism.^    In  all  these  passages 
this  zeal  for  the  mortification  of  the  body  is  accom- 
panied by  a  neglect  of  the  real  commands  of  the  law. 

These  matters  are  not  reasoned  out,  they  are  not 
traced  to  their  roots,  and  answered  by  an  exposure  of 
the  errors  involved ;  the  answer  is,  instead,  an  appeal 
to  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel,  and  especially  by 
pointing  out  its  practical  ends.  Legalism  is  met  by  the 
statement  that  the  law  is  not  intended  for  the  right- 
eous, but  for  sinners ;  it  is  intended  to  act  as  a  check 

M  Tim.  4:3.  2  2  Tim.  2: 18.  »  2  Tim.  3  : 1-3. 

*  1  Tim.  1 : 6,  7  ;  4  :  3,  7,  8  ;  2  Tim.  3:5;  Tit.  3 :  9. 

L 


146  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

upon  the  violators  of  the  law.  This  is  the  exact 
opposite  of  the  statement  of  Paul,  that  the  law  is 
unattainable  because  of  the  sins  of  men.  The  false 
legalism  which  dwells  upon  the  external  commands  of 
the  law,  its  bodily  restraints  and  disciplines,  is  con- 
trasted with  the  practical  morality  of  the  law,  which 
is  reenforced  by  the  grace  of  the  Gospel.^  Asceticism 
is  met  by  the  very  simple  statement  that  every  crea- 
ture of  God  is  good.  Kesurrection  of  the  spirit  instead 
of  the  body  is  simply  labelled  as  abhorrent,  not  argued 
at  all.  Jewish  fables  and  genealogies  are  ridiculed  as 
unpractical.  In  fact,  here  is  the  contention  against 
the  Gnostic  error  generally,  that  it  does  not  conform 
to  the  practical  teachings  of  the  Gospel,  but  draws 
men's  attention  away  to  useless  questions  and  contro- 
versies." 
Moral  teach-  But  the  moral  teaching,  though  so  insistent,  is  not 
mgof  the  ygpy  \iig]x  in  its  spiritual  tone.  It  is  about  the  level 
of  the  catechism  in  the  hands  of  an  ordinary  minister, 
instead  of  reflecting  the  insight  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  or  the  inspiration  of  the  epistles  of  Paul. 
Much  is  said  about  the  healthful  teaching  according  to 
godliness,  but  both  the  teaching  and  the  piety  to  which 
it  is  conformed  are  taken  for  granted,  and  must  be 
therefore  of  the  simplest  kind.  Neither  Jesus  nor 
Paul  take  the  new  ethics  for  granted ;  mere  exhortations 
to  righteousness,  without  definitions  of  righteousness, 
are  out  of  place  in  their  thorough  teaching.  Paul,  for 
example,  seeks  the  foundation  of  the  Gospel  in  a  care- 
fully analysed  statement  of  things  divine  and  human, 
and  of  the  office  of  Christ  in  their  adjustment,  and 
this  he  makes  the  motive  power  of  a  new  life. 

It  would  be  unjust,  however,  to  leave  this  part  of  our 

1  1  Tim.  1:3-5;   6  r3-6  ;   2  Tim.  2  :  22,  23  ;   Tit.  1 :  10-16 ; 
3 : 8,  9. 

3  1  Tim.  1:4:  4:7:  6:4. 


THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES  147 

subject  without  calling  attention  to  the  consonance  of  Their 
this  teaching  with  the  peculiar  spirit  of  Christianity.  Christianity. 
Among  the  world  religions  its  chief  excellence  is  this 
emphasis  of  the  ethical  aim  of  religion,  that  men 
know  God  only  when  they  recognise  in  him  the  Being 
who  cares  first  and  last  for  the  ethical  good  of  mankind, 
and  who  for  this  one  end  will  sacrifice  anything,  and 
seeks  by  all  means  to  imbue  them  with  the  same  spirit. 
A  writing,  therefore,  which  insists  on  this  same  sine 
qua  non,  whose  one  word  is  "  be  careful  to  maintain 
good  works,"  since  this  is  the  object  of  the  grace  of 
God,  has  this  distinction,  that  it  keeps  before  us  the 
main  thing.  These  epistles  may  be  overweighted  on 
the  practical  side,  and  their  morals  may  lack  inspira- 
tion, but  they  are  a  necessary  antidote  against  doctri- 
nal excess. 

This  same  simplicity  extends  to  the  doctrine  of  our  Doctrine  of 
Lord's  person  in  these  epistles.  He  is  the  manifesta-  ""jgi^'^*^'^ 
tion  of  God  in  the  flesh,  of  whom  the  record  is  that  he 
was  justified  in  the  Spirit,  seen  by  angels,  preached 
among  the  nations,  believed  on  in  the  world,  received 
up  into  glory .^  He  is  the  one  for  whose  appearance 
all  things  wait,  who  while  here,  witnessed  a  good  con- 
fession before  Pontius  Pilate.^  He  is  the  Saviour  who 
abolished  death  and  brought  immortality  to  light 
through  the  Gospel.'  He  is  the  one  to  whom  the 
believer  commits  himself,  and  who  is  able  to  keep  that 
which  is  committed  to  him.*  But  he  sustains  some 
inward  relation  to  the  believer,  who  lives  and  dies 
with  him,  who  reigns  and  endures  with  him.''  This  is 
not  the  mysticism  of  Paul,  his  "  in  Christ,"  but  it  does 
resemble  his  idea  that  the  acts  and  fortunes  of  our 
Lord's  life  the  believer  shares,  owing  to  the  represen- 
tative character  of   those   acts.     The  abolishing  of 

1  1  Tim.  3  :  16.  ^  1  Tim.  6 :  13-15.  »  2  Tim.  1 :  10. 

*  2  Tim.  1 :  12.  6  2  Tim.  2 :  11,  12. 


148 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Doctrine  of 
salvation. 


The  simplic- 
ity belongs 
to  late 
period  of 
creeds. 


death,  and  bringing  to  light  of  life  and  incorruption, 
is  also  a  Pauline  statement.  Altogether,  it  is  an 
eclectic  teaching,  containing  within  itself  some  Pauline 
and  some  pre-Pauline  statements,  but  not  a  teaching 
from  which  one  can  formulate  anything  more  than 
a  general  definition  of  the  nature  or  source  of  our 
Lord's  person. 

The  simplicity  and  practical  nature  of  the  teaching 
of  the  Pastoral  Epistles  appears  also  in  their  state- 
ment of  the  doctrine  of  salvation.  The  grace  of  God 
in  Christ  is  shown  in  the  deliverance  of  men  from  sin 
itself.  This  accords  with  the  aim  of  the  epistles,  to 
fix  the  attention  upon  the  ethical  purpose  of  the  Gos- 
pel. This  is  true  of  what  is  said  about  the  work  of 
our  Lord,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Redemption  from 
sin  and  the  purification  of  a  people  zealous  of  good 
works  is  the  purpose  of  our  Lord's  death.*  And  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  the  agent  through  whom  this  salvation 
is  effectually  worked  in  men's  souls.'^ 

This  particular  kind  of  simplicity  follows,  instead 
of  preceding,  a  period  of  doctrinal  elaboration  and 
development.  It  is  that  simplicity,  in  the  first  place, 
which  comes  as  a  reaction  from  doctrinal  excess. 
Gnosticism  is  professedly  an  advance  from  faith  to 
knowledge ;  it  is  an  attempt  to  rationalise  the  contents 
of  the  faith.  And  the  method  is  that  of  a  definite 
system,  an  attempt  to  state  Christianity,  just  as  Philo 
had  restated  Judaism,  in  the  terms  of  a  Gentile  phi- 
losophy. Against  this  the  writer  protests,  not  simply 
as  a  false  philosophy,  but  as  a  philosophy.  But  where 
Paul  uses  the  weapons  of  inspiration  and  intuition, 
and  the  writer  of  Ephesians  and  Colossians  makes  use 
of  his  knowledge  of  the  philosophy  applied  to  the 
statement  of  Christianity  to  show  that  its  real  teach- 
ing exalts  Christ,  instead  of  putting  him  to  one  side, 
1  Tit.  2 :  14.  2  Tit.  3  :  4,  7. 


THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES  14^ 

these  epistles  reduce  everything  to  the  brevity  of  creed 
statements.  The  simplicity  of  tRe  early  faith  was 
that  of  the  intuitions,  the  things  seen,  not  reasoned 
out  by  the  soul ;  this  simplicity  comes  after  an  inter- 
mediate process  of  rationalising,  and  by  a  process  of 
elimination  reduces  everything  to  a  series  of  state- 
ments to  be  packed  away  and  kept  for  ready  use. 

Another  sign  that  we  are  in  the  first  stages  of  the  Doctrine  of 
Catholic  Church,  and  therefore  in  a  later  period  than  *^®  Church, 
that  of  the  Jewish  controversy  against  Paul,  a  period 
in  which  the  unity  of  the  Church  is  asserting  itself 
against  these  divisions,  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Church 
itself.  Church  officers  in  the  early  period  were  men 
who  had  certain  gifts  conferred  on  them  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  who  occupied  the  positions  involved  in  the 
exercise  of  these  gifts,  and  not  conferred  by  appoint- 
ment or  election.  When  we  emerge  into  the  period 
of  elective  officers,  they  are  bishops,  elders,  and  dea- 
cons. And  of  these,  all  three  appear  in  the  Pastoral 
Epistles  by  name.  Not  only  by  name,  but  their  gen- 
eral functions  are  those  exercised  by  the  same  officers 
in  the  later  period  of  full  organisation.  Administra- 
tion is  a  chief  mark  of  these  offices  in  both  periods, 
and  the  teaching  office,  which  figures  so  largely  in  the 
work  of  these  officers  in  the  later  organisation,  appears 
here  for  the  first  time,  though  in  a  rudimentary  and 
subordinate  form.^  But  the  differences  between  the 
later  and  earlier  offices  are  quite  as  marked.  In  the 
first  place,  bishop  and  elder  are  interchangeable  terms. 
In  Tit.  1 :  6,  7,  the  argumentative  "  For  "  of  verse  7  is 
quite  out  of  place  unless  bishops  and  elders  are  iden- 
tical. Secondly,  all  these  officers,  bishops  as  well  as 
deacons,  are  confined  to  the  local  church  in  their  juris- 
diction. The  charge  of  a  bishop  is  not  a  diocese,  but 
a  church.  Thirdly,  there  are  several  bishops,  or  elders, 
1  1  Tim.  3:2:  Tit.  1 :  9. 


150  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

in  each  church.^  Fourthly,  the  functions  are  mostly 
administrative,  the  teaching  office  being  subordinated, 
and  a  distinction  being  made  between  teaching  elders 
and  others,  implying,  of  course,  that  the  teaching  func- 
tion is  not  common  to  them  all.*  Timothy  and  Titus 
themselves  are  regarded  as  the  responsible  teachers, 
and  probably  the  teaching  continued  to  be  done  by 
men  like  them,  who  possessed  the  gift,  instead  of  being 
officially  designated,  and  whose  office  pertained  to  the 
general  Church,  not  to  a  local  church.  With  the  ex- 
ception of  this  occasional  teaching,  the  offices  are  lay 
functions,  not  spiritual,  and  so  not  clerical.  It  is  the 
administration  of  affairs  which  is  intrusted  to  them, 
not  the  cure  of  souls. 

The  great  step  forward  in  the  constitution  of  the 
Church  is  that  the  Church  itself  is  described  as  a  teach- 
ing body.'  And  the  standard  to  which  opinions  are 
referred,  the  pattern  of  healthful  words,  is  such  a 
formulation  of  beliefs  as  arises  in  the  attempt  to  im- 
press its  beliefs  on  its  members.  The  importance  of 
this  change  is  obvious,  when  we  consider  that  the 
Church  had  been,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  not  a  teach- 
ing Church,  but  one  requiring  instruction.  The  Gen- 
tile part  of  the  Church,  at  least,  had  been  converted  to 
Christianity  out  of  religions  which  contributed  nothing 
to  the  understanding  of  Christianity,  and  their  teach- 
ing could  come,  therefore,  from  Jewish  sources  only, 
and  not  from  within.  For  such  a  Church,  years  must 
pass  before  a  public  opinion  shall  be  formed  within 
itself  by  which  individual  vagaries  and  growths  of 
opinion  can  be  tested.  Especially  is  this  the  case 
when  the  churches  are  recruited  out  of  the  un  in- 
structed classes,  out  of  men  who  held  simply  the 
pagan  and  idolatrous  beliefs,  and  had  not  thought 
themselves  out  into  purer  beliefs  or  doubts. 

1  Tit.  1:5.  2  1  Tim.  6:17.  «1  Tim.  3:15. 


CHAPTER  III 

2  PETER  AND  JUDE  i 

We  can  speak  with  some  probability  of  the  author-  Author, 
ship  of  1  Peter,  but  of  2  Peter  we  can  say  with  all 
reasonable  certainty,  that  it  is  not  by  the  author  of  1 
Peter.  The  key- word  of  this  epistle  is  knowledge.  It 
is  by  the  knowledge  of  God  and  of  Christ,  that  believ- 
ers obtain  all  things  belonging  to  life  and  godliness, 
and  this  word  is  dwelt  upon  in  chapter  1  with  a  fre- 
quency that  is  quite  distinguishing.  It  is  a  knowledge 
brought  to  them  by  the  preaching  of  Christ,  and  by 
the  Old  Testament  prophecies,  and  it  is  contrasted 
with  the  false  teaching  of  the  later  times.*  But  while 
this  use  of  gnosis  points  probably  to  a  personal  differ- 
ence, a  habit  of  mind  distinguished  from  1  Peter,  and 

1  On  authenticity,  date,  etc.,  of  2  Peter  and  Jude  see  Bacon, 
Introduction  to  the  iV.  T.;  Weiss,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.,  II, 
118-128,  154-174  ;  Salmon,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.,  469-508  ; 
Hilgenfeld,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.,  739-744,  7G5-770 ;  Holtz- 
mann,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.,  321  sq. ;  Zahn,  Einleitung  in 
das  N.  T.,  II,  42-110 ;  Spitta,  Der  zioeite  Brief  des  Fetrus  und  der 
Brief  des  Judas :  eine  geschichtliche  Untersuchung  ;  McGiffert, 
The  Apostolic  Age,  600  sq. ;  Keil,  The  Epistles  of  Peter  and 
Jude;  Kiihl,  Comm.  in  the  Meyer  series ;  Lumby,  Speaker's 
Commentary. 

On  the  doctrines  of  the  epistles  see  Stevens,  Theology  of  the 
N.  T,  312-324  ;  Beyschlag,  New  Testament  Theology,  II,  490- 
501;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T,  II,  234-248;  Holtzmann, 
Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  318-328;  Bovon,  Theologie  du 
N.  T.,  II,  479-488. 

a  Chapter  2. 

161 


152 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Anachro- 
nisms. 


Comparison 
with  other 
N.  T.  books. 


with  some  certainty  to  an  anachronism,  gnosis  being 
the  mark  of  a  later  time ;  the  antinomianism  in  chap- 
ter 2  is  certainly  out  of  place  within  the  lifetime  of 
any  apostle  except  John.  The  seeds  of  antinomianism 
in  the  first  century  were  very  slight,  and  the  checks 
were  constant,  so  that  such  a  growth  as  is  pictured 
here  of  a  principled  licentiousness  actually  inculcated 
by  those  claiming  to  be  Christian  teachers  would  be 
almost  impossible  until  late  in  the  century.  But  there 
is  another  anachronism  even  more  evident.  The  ex- 
pectation of  our  Lord's  coming  was  one  of  the  ele- 
ments and  motifs  of  that  generation,  and  the  delay  in 
the  event  caused  some  questioning.  But  there  is  never 
any  indication  that  it  may  be  indefinitely  postponed. 
The  early  Church  never  had  to  face  the  difficulty  forced 
upon  the  Church  to-day,  of  belief  in  his  second  com- 
ing, founded  upon  a  prophecy  of  his  coming  during 
the  lifetime  of  a  generation  long  since  dead.  And 
until  this  epistle,  we  do  not  find  any  traces  of  such  ex- 
egetical  legerdemain  as  such  a  situation  would  require. 
But  here  we  have  it  full-grown ;  just  such  a  specimen 
of  harmonistic  device  as  orthodox  interpretation  famil- 
iarises us  with.  The  definite  statement  that  the  ad- 
vent is  to  be  within  that  generation  is  met  with  the 
general  principle  that  "  one  day  is  with  the  Lord  as  a 
thousand  years,  and  a  thousand  years  as  one  day."  ^ 

Then  the  comparison  of  this  epistle  with  1  Peter 
reveals  a  linguistic  difference  which  shares  with  the 
appendix  to  Mark  the  distinction  of  being  the  only 
cases  of  their  kind.  There  are  in  1  and  2  Peter  120 
words  not  found  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament ;  63 
in  1  Peter,  and  57  in  2  Peter,  and  there  is  only  one 
such  word  common  to  the  two  epistles.  This  creates 
an  impossibility  like  that  of  dropping  the  requisite 


1  2  Pet.  3 :  8. 


S  PETER  AND  JUDE  153 

letters  in  a  box,  and  having  them  come  out  in  the  order 
of  a  line  of  Shakespeare.  The  law  of  chance  is  against 
not  only  the  probability  of  such  a  result,  but  the  pos- 
sibility of  it. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  affinity  between  this  epistle  Judo,  the 
and  Jude  is  such  as  to  make  it  certain  that  one  or  the  2'1^'ter.  ^ 
other  borrowed.  Which  did  the  borrowing  is  uncer- 
tain, but  the  principles  for  deciding  such  cases  point 
with  some  certainty  to  Jude  as  the  original.  The  ad- 
vantage of  vigour,  conciseness,  boldness  of  treatment, 
is  plainly  with  this  writer.  But  the  fact  of  affinity  is 
undoubted.  The  warning  examples  of  the  fallen 
angels,  and  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,^  the  reviling  of 
angels,  and  the  citation  of  Balaam,^  are  conspicuous 
examples  of  this  borrowing.  But  the  most  conspicuous 
proof  of  it  is  in  a  certain  extravagance  of  language, 
quite  unexampled  in  the  New  Testament.  This  affinity 
makes  it  unnecessary  to  deal  with  Jude  separately,  as 
everything  in  it  is  contained  in  2  Peter.  That  epistle 
is  simply  Jude  with  such  enlargements  as  suited  the 
more  extended  purpose  of  its  writer.  The  part  of  2 
Peter  Avhich  is  taken  from  Jude  is  the  second  chapter. 

The  distinction  between  knowledge  (gnosis)  and  The  gnosis 
faith  (pistis)  in  2  Peter  is  interesting,  because  both 
the  distinction  itself  and  the  ascription  of  superiority 
to  gnosis  are  distinct  marks  of  a  time  later  than 
would  consist  with  Petrine  authorship.  Like  Gnosti- 
cism, which  is  a  false  gnosis,  the  developed  form  of 
it  belongs  to  the  second  century,  but  there  is  a  ger- 
minal form  of  both  which  is  found  in  the  first  century, 
though  only  in  the  last  decades  of  the  century.  The 
word  is  not  lightly  substituted  for  faith ;  it  is  evident 
that,  while  it  is  made  interchangeable  with  faith, 
it  is  yet  used  with  a  sense  of  difference,  and  with  an 

1  2  Pet.  2:4-6;  Jude  6,  7.  ^2  Pet.  2 :  16  ;  Jude  11. 


of  2  Peter. 


154  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

emphasis  of  these  differentiating  qualities.  It  is  the 
difference  conveyed,  e.g.,  by  a  man  who  hears  another 
say  that  he  believes  a  thing  to  be  so,  and  puts  in  the 
word,  "  I  know  it  is  so." 

It  is  implied  here  distinctly  that  faith  is  the 
starting  point  in  the  Christian  life,  but  that  it  must 
grow  into  knowledge  before  it  is  completed.  Faith 
and  knowledge  are,  however,  not  essentially  differen- 
tiated from  each  other  in  this  first  chapter;  one  is 
treated  as  being  of  the  same  general  sort  as  the  other, 
but  knowledge  being  the  completer  of  the  two,  the 
writer  plainly  indicates  his  preference  for  the  word 
"  knowledge."  So  he  begins  with  faith,  verse  1,  but 
passes  quickly  on  to  knowledge,  verse  2,  and  after 
that  uses  knowledge  constantly,  except  in  verse  5, 
where  he  shows  his  reason  for  the  preference,  since 
knowledge  is  the  step  beyond  faith,  and  so  the  sign  of 
Christian  growth.  So,  he  says,  since  without  this  you 
are  blind,  shortsighted,  you  must  go  on  to  make  your 
calling  and  election  sure.  If  you  do  not  make  this 
progress,  you  will  come  to  forget  even  the  cleansing 
from  sin  which  accompanied  your  faith.  In  fact,  the 
course  of  thought,  which  is  complicated  by  the  double 
use  of  the  word  "knowledge,"  identifying  it  on  the  one 
side  with  faith,  and  on  the  other  with  the  more  ad- 
vanced cognition  to  which  the  author  gives  the  name, 
is  intended  to  show  the  necessity  of  advance,  not  only 
from  faith  to  the  more  perfect  form  of  knowledge, 
but  also  from  faith  to  virtue,  and  in  virtue  itself  from 
the  more  elementary  form  which  has  its  roots  in 
faith,  to  the  advanced  stage  which  has  its  source  in 
knowledge.  It  reads  something  like  this :  "  In  your 
faith  supply  yourself  with  virtue,  do  not  stop  with 
mere  faith.  But  this  is  not  all ;  in  your  virtue  sup- 
ply yourselves  with  knowledge;  do  not  stop  in  the 
rudimentary  stage  of  virtue  which  has  its  roots  in 


S  PETEB  AND  JUDE  155 

faith;  and  having  gained  knowledge,  go  on  to  self- 
control,  steadfastness,  piety,  brotherly  love,  and  that 
highest  form  of  love  which  includes  not  only  brothers, 
but  humanity."  It  is  through  this  knowledge,  he 
says,  that  they  become  partakers  of  the  divine  nature, 
that  they  receive  all  things  pertaining  to  life  and 
piety,  and  that  they  escape  the  corruption  of  the 
world.^  It  is  as  man  becomes  conscious  of  containing 
within  himself  a  knowledge  which  seeks  completion 
and  sees  the  other  side  of  itself  in  virtue,  a  virtue 
which  begins  with  self-restraint,  and  goes  on  through 
steadfastness  to  brotherly  love,  and  finally  to  imiver- 
sal  love,  that  he  comes  to  possess  that  affinity  with 
God  which  is  his  normal  state,  the  true  glory  of  his 
being. 

This  knowledge  is  a  knowledge  of  the  Lord  and  Source  of 
Saviour,  Jesus  Christ.^  It  is  said  ^  to  be  a  knowledge  g^ge.  °°^ " 
of  God  as  well,  and  the  two  parts  of  this  knowledge 
are  related  to  each  other  by  the  mediatorial  office  of 
our  Lord :  he  is  the  source  of  our  knowledge  of  God. 
And  in  speaking  to  them  of  this  knowledge  of  our 
Lord,  the  author  is  not  following  sophists'  fables,  but 
the  testimony  of  his  own  senses,  having  been  an  eye- 
witness of  the  glory  of  the  Lord  on  the  mountain  of 
transfiguration,  and  having  heard  with  his  own  ears 
the  words  of  God,  "  Thou  art  my  beloved  Son,  in 
whom  I  came  to  take  pleasure."  And  this  is  only  a 
representative  case,  the  testimony  in  general  being 
that  of  the  apostles.  Then,  besides  this,  they  have 
the  testimony  of  the  prophets  in  regard  to  the  same 
things,  confirmed  as  they  have  been  by  the  fulfilment 
in  the  life  of  our  Lord.  Only  these  prophecies  are 
not  the  product  of  the  individual  knowledge  of  the 
prophets,  but  of  the  Spirit  of  God  which  inspired 

1 1 : 3,  4  a  3  :  18  ;  1 : 8.  «  1 : 2. 


156  NEW  TESTAMENT  TBEOLOGT 

them,  and  they  are  to  be  interpreted  in  the  same  way, 
not  by  an  application  to  them  of  individual  acumen, 
but  through  the  same  Spirit  by  which  they  were  given 
originally.^  He  represents  himself,  therefore,  as  un- 
wearied in  his  endeavour  to  bring  to  them  this  word 
which  has  so  inestimable  results,  and  the  lack  of 
which  is  so  equally  disastrous.^ 

The  second  chapter  makes  it  clear  to  what  class  of 
writings  this  epistle  belongs.  In  the  extra-canonical 
Jewish  literature,  and  in  the  book  of  Daniel  in  the 
Old  Testament  canon,  we  have  a  peculiar  sort  of 
writing,  in  which  great  men  of  the  past  are  raised 
up  to  foretell  the  sins  of  the  present  and  to  castigate 
them.  Daniel,  e.g.,  is  made  by  the  writer  to  foretell 
the  events  between  the  captivity  and  the  Syrian 
oppression  of  the  Jews  under  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
in  order  to  confirm  the  prophecy  of  deliverance  from 
that  oppression.  The  device  becomes  evident  when 
we  discover  by  indubitable  proof  that  the  writer  of 
the  book  belonged  to  the  later  time  himself,  and 
has  therefore  turned  history  into  prophecy  in  order 
to  enforce  the  religious  lessons  of  his  own  times. 
Whether  this  is  a  legitimate  device  or  not,  is  not  a 
question  which  concerns  us ;  it  is  enough  that  it  is  a 
characteristic  Jewish  device.  Now  the  writer  of 
this  epistle,  who  is  shown  to  belong  to  a  later  age 
than  Peter,  impersonates  Peter,  in  order  that  his 
warnings  to  his  generation  may  receive  the  added 
force  which  would  be  given  them  if  they  were 
prophecies  of  that  apostle  of  the  evils  which  belong 
to  the  writer's  time.  The  writer  himself  exposes  his 
innocent  device,  since  in  his  description  of  the  dangers 
threatening  them,  the  futures  become  presents.' 

The  danger  with  which  his  readers  are  threatened  is 

11:20,21.  2  1:12-15. 

•  Compare  2: 1,  2,  3  ;  3:3  with  2  :  10-22  j  3 :  5,  9. 


S  PETER  AND  JUBE  157 

one  which  constantly  awaits  religious  teaching  —  the  Warning 
danger  of  counterfeits.  There  have  been  false  prophets  hfresfes 
always,  and  such  will  come  again,  and  befoul  the  waters 
of  Christian  truth,  as  they  have  other  springs  of  knowl- 
edge. The  particular  heresy  of  which  these  men  are 
guilty  is  the  antinomian  heresy.  They  deny  the  con- 
nection on  which  the  epistle  insists,  between  knowl- 
edge and  virtue,  and  propagate  instead  a  knowledge 
which  looses  the  bonds  of  virtue,  and  becomes  a  prin- 
cipled licentiousness.  This  warning  is  the  part  of  the 
epistle  which  coincides  with  Jude,  and  of  which  the 
language  is  so  extravagant.  But  the  extravagant  lan- 
guage only  indicates  an  extreme  danger,  a  state  of 
things  which  comes  not  only  from  a  falling  away  from 
early  purity,  but  a  license  which  justifies  itself  as  a 
legitimate  outgrowth  of  religious  teaching.  A  part  of 
this  justification  is  contained  in  the  railing  against 
angels,  for  which  they  are  sharply  rebuked.  The 
reference  is  difficult  to  trace,  but  the  close  connection 
with  their  own  going  after  strange  flesh,^  suggests  an 
explanation.  Their  licentiousness  is  a  principled 
license,  and  among  the  ways  in  which  they  seek  to 
justify  it  is  by  an  appeal  to  the  Alexandrian"  doctrine 
of  commerce  between  angels  and  men.  Angels  in  this 
philosophy  occupy  all  the  aerial  and  heavenly  spaces, 
and  those  in  the  upper  spheres  are  drawn  still  further 
up,  while  those  below,  living  near  the  earth,  gravitate 
downward,  drawn  by  the  seductions  of  material  and 
sensual  things,  and  people  human  bodies.  The  rail- 
ing at  angels,  therefore,  would  consist  in  a  more  or 
less  cynical  appeal  to  their  roving  propensities  as  jus- 
tifying the  sensual  indulgence  of  men.  The  answer 
to  this  ^  is  that  these  angels  who  kept  not  their  first 
principality,  but  left  their  proper  habitation,  God  has 

12:14,  18;  Jude  7,  8.  «  Jude  6. 


158 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


As  to  the 
second  com- 
inu  of  Jesus. 


Subsidiary 
doctrines. 


cast  down  into  hell  to  be  reserved  for  judgment. 
Their  actions,  therefore,  are  scarcely  to  be  attributed  to 
the  class  of  angels,  and  ought  not  to  be  used  as  a  railing 
accusation  against  the  whole  angelic  race. 

Besides  this  heresy,  the  writer  warns  them  against 
a  doubt,  which  is  growing  among  them,  of  the  Lord's 
second  coming.  It  must  be  remembered  that  the  ful- 
filment of  this  prophecy  was  to  take  place  within  our 
Lord's  own  generation,  and  that  the  delay  is  explained 
by  the  principle  that  one  day  is  with  the  Lord  as  a 
thousand  years,  and  a  thousand  years  as  one  day. 
This  explanation  cuts  two  ways ;  in  the  first  place,  it 
implies  that  a  hope  which  is  disappointed  by  a  delay 
of  two  or  more  generations  could  not  have  been  origi- 
nally created  by  a  promise  which  itself  allows  indefi- 
nite postponement,  like  that  upon  which  the  Church 
bases  its  present  doctrine.  Evidently  a  difficulty 
which  requires  such  a  device  as  this  for  its  removal 
presupposes  just  the  expectation  a  sound  exegesis 
finds  throughout  the  New  Testament,  of  a  coming 
within  the  generation  following  the  death  of  Jesus. 
Then,  in  the  second  place,  the  postponement  must  be 
long  to  create  the  necessity  for  such  an  explanation  as 
this.  There  is  also  a  new  form  given  to  the  prophecy 
itself.  We  have  portents  in  the  Apocalypse,  and  a 
renovation  of  nature  in  Paul,  but  to  these  is  added  here 
a  destruction  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth  by  fire,  to 
be  replaced  by  new  heavens  and  an  earth  in  which 
dwelleth  righteousness.^ 

There  is  nothing  to  indicate  the  special  view  taken 
of  the  person  of  our  Lord.  He  is  given  two  titles 
throughout  the  epistle.  Lord  and  Saviour.  His  lord- 
ship is  evidently  the  Messianic  rule  which  is  to  be 
established  at  his  coming,     And  the  salvation   is 


1  1 :  1-13. 


g  PETER  AND  JUDE  159 

the  process  of  redemption  from  their  old  sins.  The 
knowledge  which  is  brought  to  them  by  the  apostles 
of  the  Lord  is  of  his  great  power  and  glory,  of  which 
the  transfiguration  is  the  chosen  manifestation.  But 
the  glory  and  honour  are  here,  as  everywhere  in  the 
New  Testament,  received  from  the  Father.^  The  sal- 
vation is  cleansing  simply,  not  expiatory.  And  it  is 
mediated  through  the  knowledge  of  Christ.  It  is  a 
purely  subjective  and  spiritual  process.  Then  we 
have  a  doctrine  of  Scripture,  which  is  defined  to  be  a 
book  which  derives  a  divine  authority  from  the  inspi- 
ration of  those  who  spoke  in  it.^  This  authority,  more- 
over, requires  a  like  authority  in  its  interpretation. 
The  interpretation  cannot  be  individual,  any  more 
than  the  original  utterance  was  individual.  This 
doctrine  of  authority,  derived  from  inspiration,  rather 
than  ecclesiastical  position,  is  the  modified  doctrine 
of  authority  held  by  Origen,  rather  than  Irenseus,  but 
the  note  of  authority  itself,  of  whatever  sort,  indicates 
a  late  date,  ranking  the  epistle  in  this  respect  with  the 
Pastoral  Epistles,  which  it  resembles,  also,  in  its  pic- 
ture of  an  extreme  antinomianism. 

11:16-18.  n;  19-21. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS 

Authorship        The  tradition  which  ascribes  this  epistle  to  Paul  is 
'^^'^tf  quite  discredited  now.^    Its  consistent  Alexandrianism, 

its  careful  writing,  belonging  to  a  literary  stylist,  are 
so  evidently  un-Pauline,  that  they  preclude  argument. 
The  Alexandrianism  of  this  epistle  belongs  not  only  to 
its  doctrine,  but  to  its  reasoning,  and  especially  to  its 
interpretation  of  Scripture.  The  allegorical  method 
of  interpretation  is  common  to  both  l*alestinian  and 
Hellenistic  Judaism,  and  its  purpose  is  the  same  in 
both,  to  extract  from  Scripture  improper  and  illegiti- 
mate meanings.  There  is  a  double  necessity  of  finding 
received  opinion  in  Scripture;    first,  for  the  sake  of 

1  On  the  author,  date,  etc.,  of  Hebrews  see  McGiffert,  Apos- 
tolic Age,  463-482;  Westcott,  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews; 
Bendall,  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  Vaughn,  The  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews;  Davidson,  Handbooks  for  Bible  Classes;  von 
Soden,  Handkommentar ;  Bleek,  Der  Brief  an  die  Hebrder ; 
Salmon,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.,  414-433 ;  Weiss,  Introduction 
to  the  N.  T.,  II,  17-44 ;  Bacon,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T. ; 
Holtzmann,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.,  292-309 ;  Zahn,  Einleitung 
in  das  N.  T.,  II,  110-158;  Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  II,  155 
sq.  On  the  teaching  of  the  epistle  see  also  Stevens,  Theology 
of  the  N.  r.,  483-522;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T,  II,  166- 
234  ;  Beyschlag,  iV.  T.  Theology,  II,  282-347  ;  Holtzmann,  Neu- 
testamentliche  Theologie,  II,  281-308 ;  Bovon,  Theologie  du 
N.  T.,  II,  387-435  ;  Kendall,  The  Theology  of  the  Hebrew  Chris- 
tians (appended  essay);  Riehm,  Der  Lehrbegriff  des  Hebraer- 
briefs;  M^n^goz,  La  Theologie  de  UEpltre  aux  Hebreux; 
Bruce,  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebreios. 

160 


THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS  161 

the  opinion,  and  secondly,  for  the  sake  of  Scripture. 
The  Bible  is  supposed  to  be  the  repository  of  truth,  all  of 
it,  and  of  nothing  else.  And  consequently,  its  support 
is  necessary  for  any  opinion,  and  on  the  other  hand  it 
discredits  Scripture  that  any  received  opinion  is  not 
to  be  found  in  it.  Hence  both  Palestinian  and  Hel- 
lenistic Judaism,  having  beliefs,  such,  for  example,  as 
the  resurrection,  not  to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament, 
resorted  to  the  legerdemain  called  allegory  to  supply 
the  deficiency.  But  Hellenistic  Judaism,  having  the 
larger  task  on  its  hands,  viz.  to  find  Mosaism  in  Greek 
philosophy,  found  it  necessary  not  only  to  resort  to 
fanciful  methods  of  interpretation,  but  to  reduce 
allegory  to  a  system,  and  elevate  it  to  a  science.  This 
mark  of  Hellenism  characterises  this  epistle  through- 
out, but  Paul  for  the  most  part  reasons  soberly.  The 
first  chapter,  for  example,  merely  assumes  the  iden- 
tity of  the  Son  with  the  Old  Testament  Yahweh,  and 
so  quotes  numerous  Yahwistic  passages  to  show  the  use  of  Old 
superiority  of  the  Son  to  the  angels.  The  play  upon  Testament, 
the  different  meanings  of  the  word  "  rest  "in  3 :  11  to 
4 :  11 ;  the  general  treatment  of  the  Melchizedek  narra- 
tive, and  especially  the  use  of  his  mysterious  entrance 
and  exit  from  the  history,  to  prove  his  divine  origin 
and  timeless  existence,  7  : 1-3 ;  and  the  play  upon  the 
two  meanings  of  Siadi^Kr],  9 :  15-18 ;  are  good  examples 
of  this  Alexandrian  habit  of  allegorising.  It  is  not 
the  dualism  of  Alexandrianism  that  we  find  utilised 
in  this  epistle,  but  its  doctrine  of  types,  or  patterns. 
It  goes  back  to  the  Platonic  statement  that  all  things 
originate  in  the  divine  ideas  or  images  of  things,  and 
that  these  patterns  of  things  in  the  divine  mind  are 
superior  always  to  the  specialised  copies  or  reproduc- 
tions in  individual  things.  Among  these  images  in 
the  divine  mind  is  one  of  the  universe,  embracing  all 
others.    These  ideas  become  objectified,  that  is,  they 


162  NEW  TESTAMENT  TUEOLOGY 

not  only  exist  as  ideas  in  the  mind  of  God,  but  obtain 
a  quasi-objectivity,  by  which  they  become  object,  and 
not  merely  subject,  to  God,  and  acqviire  creative  force. 
They  are  the  organs  of  creation.  In  the  Jewish  ter- 
minology, the  inferior  ideas  become  angels,  and  the 
superior  and  universal  idea  becomes  the  Son  of  God, 
or  the  Word.  This  philosophy  is  used  by  the  writer 
to  justify  his  exaltation  of  Christianity  over  Judaism. 
Judaism  is  the  imperfect  copy  of  the  divine  idea, 
while  Christianity  is  itself  the  perfect  idea. 
The  purpose  The  object  of  the  epistle,  about  which  all  we  know 
epistle.  ^s  ^^^^  ^*  ^^^  meant  for  Hebrew  Christians,  probably 

outside  of  Palestine,  is  to  save  its  hearers  from  a 
lapse  into  Judaism.  It  differs  from  the  Pauline  situa- 
tion in  that  the  danger  threatens  from  the  priestly 
side  of  Judaism,  not  from  its  Rabbinical  or  Pharisaic 
side.  It  is  priestly  expiation  of  sin,  not  a  doctrine 
of  works,  against  which  the  writer  argues.^  To  meet 
this  danger,  the  epistle  asserts  the  superiority  of  the 
Son,  which  is  its  title  for  our  Lord,  over  angels 
through  whom  the  message  of  Judaism  was  spoken, 
over  Moses  who  was  its  principal  figure,  and  over  the 
priesthood  who  form  its  sacrificial  class.^  In  demon- 
Superiority  strating  the  superiority  of  the  Son  over  angels,  the 
of  the  Son.     Alexandrian  doctrine  of  his  mediatorial  office  in  crea- 

1  This  fact  gives  us  a  hint  as  to  the  place  of  its  composition. 
This  would  not  originate  in  Palestine,  but  in  some  place  where 
a  different  type  of  Judaism  flourished.  Moreover,  the  argu- 
ment is  addressed  to  Hellenists,  and  would  be  understood  by  no 
others.  Positively,  therefore,  the  location  would  be  some  cen- 
tre of  Hellenism,  possibly  Alexandria.  To  travel  still  further 
afield  in  the  region  of  conjecture,  where  you  find  blazings  but 
not  paths,  ApoUos  is  the  one  N.  T.  personage  who  is  identified 
with  Hellenism  by  Paul's  description  in  1  Cor.,  and  the  con- 
jecture that  he  is  the  author  has  at  least  this  support.  But  see 
Harnack's  brilliant  essay  in  Zeits.  N.  T.  Wiss.  h.  1.  1900, 
favouring  Priscilla.  *  Heb.  chs.  1-6. 


THE  EPISTLE  TO   THE  HEBREWS  163 

tion  and  his  manifestation  of  the  divine  substance 
and  glory  is  utilised.  Old  Testament  passages,  more- 
over, which  contain  statements  about  Yahweh  are 
applied  to  him.  But  it  is  a  curious  evidence  of  the 
sense  in  which  the  divine  name  is  applied  to  him,  that 
in  the  next  verse  God  is  called  his  God.^  This  juxta- 
position of  apparently  incongruous  ideas  is  exactly 
parallel  to  "  The  Word  was  God,"  and  "  was  with 
God"  of  Jn.  1:1.  It  is  explained  only  by  the  Alex- 
andrian philosophy,  which  makes  the  Word  to  be  both 
subject  and  object  to  God,  one  whose  objectivity 
has  this  necessity,  that  it  alone  makes  a  cosmogony 
possible. 

This  superiority  to  angels  appears  also  on  the  side  The  human- 
of  our  Lord's  humanity.  He  is  identified  with  the  ity  of  Jesus. 
Son  of  man  of  Ps.  8,  who  is  for  a  short  time  made 
less  than  the  angels,  but  ultimately  crowned  with 
glory  and  honour,  and  set  over  the  works  of  God,  even 
over  all  things.  This  identification  of  the  genus  hio- 
maniim  of  the  Psalms  with  the  Messianic  Son  of  man 
is  a  good  example  of  the  ingenious  way  in  which  the 
author  treats  Scripture.  But  the  reasons  which  are 
given  for  the  incarnation  are  interesting,  first,  as  the 
emergence  into  Scripture  of  a  rationale  of  the  incarna- 
tion ;  and  secondly,  for  the  spirituality  and  thought- 
fulness  of  the  treatment.  The  central  thought  is  that 
God  became  incarnate  that  he  might  share  the  nature 
of  those  whose  spiritual  deliverance  he  was  to  effect. 
They  were  to  become  his  spiritual  children,  and  as 
father  and  child  must  be  of  the  same  nature,  he  took 
the  nature  which  belonged  already  to  the  children. 
The  reasoning  here  in  its  logical  form  is  strange,  but 
in  its  underlying  thought,  contains  the  essence  of  the 
incarnation.^    But,  for  the  performance  of  his  priestly 

11:9.  a  Heb.  2  :  14. 


164 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  purpose 
of  the  sac- 
rifice of 
Christ. 


office,  the  likeness  between  himself  and  those  for 
whom  he  was  to  mediate  with  God  is  also  necessary. 
]\Ien  were  to  be  perfected  in  the  peculiar  sense  which 
belongs  to  the  priestly  view  of  this  epistle ;  that  is, 
the  defect  in  them  caused  by  sin  was  to  be  made  up 
by  means  over  and  above  the  amendment  of  their 
moral  condition  ;  the  condition  of  moral  completeness 
was  to  be  restored,  and  this  could  be  done  only  through 
the  suffering  of  him  who  was  to  be  the  author  of  their 
salvation.  This  suffering,  however,  was  not  to  be  vica- 
rious in  the  crude  sense;  it  was  the  suffering  of  one 
upon  whom  God  sends  trials  of  various  kinds,  in  order 
to  test  and  establish  his  moral  stability.^ 

This  is  a  remarkable  variation  of  the  sacrificial  and 
priestly  view  of  redemption.  It  merges  the  sacrificial 
with  the  moral  view  of  salvation.  There  is  something 
in  God  which  needs  to  be  satisfied  besides  the  satis- 
faction which  he  has  in  the  return  of  the  sinner  to 
righteousness  ;  that  is  the  root  of  the  sacrificial  view. 
According  to  Paul,  this  is  his  righteousness.  God 
has  overlooked  sin  in  the  previous  life  of  the  accepted 
sinner,  and  now  he  accepts  an  inferior  righteousness, 
so  that  something  must  be  provided  which  shall  em- 
phasise his  own  righteousness,  something  which  shall 
represent  his  anger  against  sin ;  and  this  is  found  in 
the  sacrifice  of  our  Lord.  But  in  this  epistle,  the 
necessity  is  not  in  God ;  it  is  in  man,  who  needs  to  be 


1  'Apxvy(>^i  2 :  10,  is  a  very  good  word  here  to  describe 
Christ's  authorship  of  our  salvation.  He  became  the  author  of 
our  restored  moral  condition  by  leading  the  way  in  the  path 
which  we  have  to  take.  I  remember  a  sermon  of  Bishop  Brooks 
on  this  subject,  in  which  he  called  our  Lord  the  Arnold  Wink- 
elried  of  our  salvation.  He  who  would  help  those  who  are 
tempted  must  himself  undergo  temptation,  and  be  perfected 
through  it.  This  is  the  meaning  given  to  the  external  suffering 
of  death  undergone  by  him  (2 :  9-18). 


THE  EPISTLE  TO   THE  HEBREWS  165 

perfectly  restored ;  but  perfect  restoration  can  be  accom- 
plished only  through  the  perfecting  of  some  one  placed 
in  the  same  condition  as  himself,  exposed  to  the  same 
temptations,  and  having  to  undergo  the  same  suffering 
which  makes  up  so  large  a  part  of  the  trial  to  which 
the  sinner  on  his  way  to  a  restored  moral  state  is 
exposed.  Really,  then,  the  priestly  element  in  sal- 
vation is  merely  formal,  and  passes  over  into  the 
moral,  which  is  thus  the  only  reality  in  the  process. 

Christ's  superiority  to  Moses  is  shown  further  in  Christ's 
another  fanciful  comparison,  in  which  Jesus  appears  t"  Mose"*^ 
as  the  builder  of  the  house,  and  Moses  as  the  house, 
or  a  constituent  part  of  it.  House  is  used  here  in  the 
double  sense  characteristic  of  the  epistle,  to  denote 
both  house  and  household,  in  order  to  introduce  Christ 
as  the  builder  and  Moses  as  the  servant  in  the  same 
house.  Christ  is  builder  of  the  house  in  a  struc- 
tural sense,  and  son  in  the  household  sense.  Moses  is 
built  into  the  house  structurally,  and  is  servant  in  the 
household.  Moreover,  Christ  appears  as  the  builder 
of  the  Jewish  system  and  church,  a  bold  conception 
which  could  only  originate  in  the  Alexandrian  idea  of 
concepts  and  copies,  applied  here  to  Christ  as  the 
perfect  idea  in  the  divine  mind  of  which  Mosaism 
was  the  imperfect  copy,  the  idea  in  Christ  becoming 
objective  and  creative.^ 

This  argument  of  completeness  vs.  incompleteness  is  The  prom, 
carried  on  in  the  discussion  of  the  rest  promised  to  ^^^'^  '"*'^^" 
Israel,  which  is  fulfilled  only  imperfectly  in  anything 
preceding  Christianity.  And  there  is  the  same  play 
upon  words  as  elsewhere.  The  rest  is  originally  the 
rest  from  their  enemies  which  was  supposed  to  be 
awaiting  them  in  the  promised  land,  the  escape  from 
the  dangers  of  the- wilderness  into  the  security  of  the 

13:1-6. 


166 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  superi- 
ority oi 
Christ's 
priesthood 
to  the  Jewish 
priesthood. 


land  of  promise.  Then  it  becomes  the  Sabbatic  rest, 
the  rest  of  God  from  the  creative  -work,  into  which 
men  are  to  enter,  but  from  which  they  are  kept  by 
their  unbelief  and  disobedience.  Joshua  was  not  able 
to  give  them  that  rest  in  the  promised  land,  nor  were 
they  able  to  enter  into  the  Sabbatic  rest.  The  two 
ideas  of  rest  from  danger  and  rest  from  toil  are 
mingled  and  confused  in  a  way  impossible  to  inter- 
pretation now,  but  easy  enough  then.^ 

But  the  epistle  comes  to  its  real  subject,  for  which 
everything  else  is  preliminary,  in  the  demonstration  of 
the  superiority  of  Christ's  priesthood  to  the  Je-nHsh 
priesthood  in  the  same  general  line  of  the  superiority 
of  type  to  copy.  The  idea  of  the  high-priesthood  must 
appear  in  Christ.  He  must  be  divinely  appointed,  not 
self-appointed ;  he  must  partake  of  the  incompleteness 
of  those  to  whom  he  ministers,  and  reach  complete- 
ness only  through  the  way  of  trial  and  testing ;  he 
must  moreover  have  something  to  offer,  and  since  it  is 
the  divine  appointment  that  only  through  shedding  of 
blood  is  there  remission  of  sins,  it  must  be  through 
death  that  he  makes  propitiation  for  sins.  But  the 
idea  of  high-priesthood  must  be  perfectly  carried  out 
in  him,  not  in  the  imperfect  manner  of  the  Aaronic 
priesthood.  He  must  not,  like  them,  abide  in  his  in- 
completeness, but  pass  through  that  to  completeness, 
so  that  his  offering  being  made  after  reaching  this 
completeness,  will  not  need  to  be  for  his  own  sins,  as 
well  as  for  those  of  the  people.  He  is  a  priest  forever, 
and  his  priesthood  therefore  does  not  need  to  pass 
over  from  him  to  others,  in  order  to  keep  up  the  suc- 
cession. Nor  does  the  offering  have  to  be  repeated, 
having  been  offered  once  for  all.  Moreover,  his  offer- 
ing is  not  of  bulls  and  goats,  which  could  never  take 


1  Heb.  4 : 1-16. 


THE  EPISTLE  TO   THE  HEBREWS  167 

away  sins,  but  the  offering  of  himself  to  do  and  bear 
all  God's  perfect  will,  which  takes  the  place  of  the 
burnt  offerings  and  offerings  for  sin  of  the  law.  It 
really  does  its  work  of  expiating  and  removing  sins, 
and  so-does  not  have  to  be  repeated  after  the  manner 
of  these  ineffectual  sacrifices.  By  this  sacrifice  he  Christ  the 
becomes  the  mediator  of  a  new  covenant,  the  essence  "mediator. 
of  which  is  found  in  Jer.  31 :  31-34,  of  a  new  law 
written,  not  on  tables  of  stone,  but  on  the  hearts  and 
minds  of  men.^  This  is  really  the  fittest  and  pro- 
foundest  statement  of  the  place  of  Christ's  death  in 
redemption  to  be  found  in  the  New  Testament,  far 
beyond  anything  in  Paul.  Christ's  death,  the  means  of 
writing  God's  perfect  law  upon  the  soul  of  men  — this 
may  be  approached  through  an  allegorical  treatment  of 
sacrifice :  it  may  have  the  defect  of  disregarding  the 
human  conditions  under  which  that  death  becomes 
inevitable,  irrespective  of  any  divine  purpose  of  it,  a 
point  of  view  absolutely  necessary  to  a  rational  under- 
standing of  it ;  but  within  this  sphere  of  the  divine 
purpose,  outside  of  the  human  conditions,  it  is  com- 
plete. 

But  this  comparison  culminates  in  the  thoroughly  Christ  and 
characteristic  paragraph  about  the  priesthood  of  Mel-  Melchizcdek. 
chizedek.  Every  point  of  this  story  which  can  be 
used  for  allegorical  purposes  is  turned  to  account.  His 
name  Melchizedek,  meaning  King  of  Righteousness,  and 
his  royal  city  Salem,  meaning  peace,  are  both  pointed 
to  as  signalising  his  greatness.  He  blessed  Abraham, 
to  whom  were  made  the  promises  on  which  Israel's 
claim  to  be  the  people  of  God  was  based,  and  as  the 
blesser  is  greater  than  the  blessed,  he  is  greater  than 
Abraham.  His  exacting  tithes  of  Abraham  is  another 
sign  of  his  superiority,  and  as  Levi  was  in  the  loins  of 

1  Heb.  5 : 1-10  ;  8  :  10. 


168  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

his  ancestor  when  the  payment  was  made,  construc- 
tively he  paid  tithes  also,  showing  the  superiority  of 
the  Melchizedek  priesthood  to  the  Levitical  priest- 
hood. Up  to  this  point  the  comparison  has  been 
between  Melchizedek  and  Abraham,  but  as  the  point 
to  be  made  is  the  superiority  of  the  priesthood  of 
Jesus  to  the  Levitical  priesthood,  a  priest  after 
the  order  of  Melchizedek,  Christ  himself  is  intro-* 
duced  at  this  point.^  But  the  allegory  culmi- 
nates in  the  statement  that  Melchizedek  is  without 
father  or  mother,  having  neither  beginning  of  days 
nor  end  of  years,  meaning  that  he  is  self-existent  and 
eternal.  All  this  is  based  merely  on  the  fact  that  he 
emerges  into  the  history  without  any  statement  of  his 
birth  or  parentage,  and  disappears  in  the  same  mys- 
terious way.  But  this  superiority  of  Christ's  priest- 
hood means  also  the  replacing  of  the  law  which  was 
given  with  the  sanctions  of  the  Levitical  priesthood, 
with  another  law,  under  the  sanctions  of  this  superior 
priesthood.  This  substitution  would  not  have  been 
made,  if  the  sacrifices  of  the  Levitical  priesthood  had 
been  able  to  remove  the  moral  defects  caused  by  vio- 
lations of  the  law.  But  Jesus,  as  the  Mediator  of  a 
new  covenant,  the  law  of  which  is  written  on  the 
heart,  is  able  to  save  utterly  those  who  draw  near  to 
God  through  him.' 
Contrast  But  this  contrast  is  not  only  between  the  priesthood 

tabrraacles*  ^^  Jesus  and  that  of  the  old  covenant,  but  also  between 
the  first  tabernacle  and  the  new  and  more  perfect  taber- 
nacle. Here  the  contrast  between  reality  and  figure, 
which  characterises  the  philosophy  of  this  book,  leads 
up  to  the  highest  conclusions.  The  true  Holy  of 
Holies  is  the  presence  of  God  in  the  heavenly  places, 
and  of  this  the  earthly  tabernacle  is  the  poor  copy  or 

17:11-22;  Ps.  110:4.  8  6:1-10:19. 


THE  EPISTLE  TO   THE  HEBREWS  169 

shadow.  To  show  this,  the  author  makes  use  of  Scrip- 
ture after  the  allegorical  manner  again,  quoting  from 
Ex.  25:40,  26:30,  27:8,  "See  thou  make  all  things 
after  the  pattern  shown  in  the  mount."  The  pattern 
is  here  the  directions  given  for  the  building  of  the 
tabernacle,  which  are  to  be  followed  literally,  like  an 
architect's  plan;  but  in  the  allegorical  rendering,  it 
becomes  the  idea  in  God's  mind,  the  heavenly  reality, 
of  which  the  earthly  tabernacle  is,  in  the  nature  of 
things,  only  a  poor  reproduction.  The  point  of  this 
is  found  in  the  statement  that  access  to  God  was 
impossible.  In  the  Holy  place,  which  constituted  the 
entrance  into  the  Holy  of  Holies,  the  priests  offered 
the  daily  sacrifices,  but  their  ineffectiveness  is  shown 
by  the  fact  that  they  had  to  be  repeated,  and  that  the 
high  priest  only  entered  the  Holy  of  Holies  once  a 
year,  making  offerings  still  for  himself  and  the  people. 
So  that  neither  priest  nor  people  were  clean,  and  the 
priest  was  never  able  to  bring  the  people  into  the 
presence.  But  now  a  real  offering  having  been  made, 
and  Jesus  having  entered,  not  the  earthly  tabernacle, 
but  the  true  tabernacle,  where  he  sat  down  at  the  right 
hand  of  God,  access  to  God  becomes  open  to  all.    There  The  superi- 

is  no  more  sacrifice ;  Jesus  himself  is  the  one  priest  °"*y  °'  *^** 

1  •  1     1         j>  1  ^^  Jesus, 

beside  whom  there  is  no  other,  and  therefore  they  are 

bidden  draw  nigh  to  God  with  full  confidence,  not  for- 
saking the  assembling  of  themselves  together.  More- 
over, the  presence  of  God  is  not  a  local  presence,  into 
which  one  can  penetrate  only  after  death,  but  the 
spiritual  presence,  into  which  men  can  come  continu- 
ally. But  the  passage  culminates  in  the  description 
of  the  substitute  for  the  different  sacrifices  provided 
in  the  death  of  Christ.  Quoting  from  Ps.  40 :  6-8,  it 
shows  that  God  did  not  desire  sacrifice,  and  that  the 
man  of  God  makes,  instead,  an  offering  of  his  obedience 
to  God.    And  it  is  in  this  aspect  that  Christ's  death 


170 


NEW  TESTAMENT  TUEOLOGY 


becomes  a  purifier  of  human  sin.  It  is  by  Christ 
thus  carrying  out  the  will  of  God,  by  the  moral  and 
spiritual  character  of  his  death,  that  he  is  able  to 
perfect  others  in  the  doing  of  the  same  will.  The 
author  here  puts  himself  squarely  on  the  prophetic 
platform,  which  insists  on  moral  perfection,  and 
abrogates  Levitical,  priestly  perfecting.  It  is  not 
only  that  Christ  substitutes  the  real  sacrifice  for  the 
figurative,  but  that  he  revolutionises  the  idea  of  sacri- 
fice, doing  away  with  it  in  the  old  sense,  and  retaining 
it  in  a  sense  scarcely  recognisable.^ 

In  a  system  like  this,  it  is  evident  what  is  the  human 
virtue  to  be  emphasised.  For  religion  becomes  in  it 
the  reality,  the  heavenly  reality,  of  which  earthly 
things  are  only  the  shadow,  and  the  requisite  in  man 
is  faith,  which  reverses  the  ordinary  standard,  and 
makes  the  invisible  real,  and  vice  versa.  Here  is 
another  of  om-  debts  to  this  religious  genius ;  he  gives 
us  a  definition  which  rationalises  and  idealises  the 
place  of  faith  in  Christianity.  It  is  that  by  which  we 
make  invisible  things  real,  and  satisfy  ourselves  of 
their  substantive  existence.  And  it  is  this  faith  in 
things  remote  from  probability,  and  secured  only 
by  divine  promise,  which  constituted  the  heroism 
and  inspired  the  righteousness  of  the  Old  Testament 
saints.^  And  yet  what  these  men  received  was  only  a 
foreshadowing  of  the  real  promise  underlying  and  out- 
reaching  all  other  promises.  Of  this  perfect  faith 
Jesus  is  the  author  and  completer,  he  having  made 
the  perfect  sacrifice  in  view  of  the  perfect  joy. 

The  point  of  the  epistle  is  thus  the  substitution  of 
the  sacrifice  of  Christ  for  the  sacrifice  provided  in  the 
law,  and  of  the  higli-priesthood  of  Christ  for  the  Jew- 
ish priesthood.     The  object  of  sacrifice  is  to  restore  to 


1  9 : 1-10 :  26. 


a  Heb.  ch.  11. 


THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS  171 

man  the  completeness  impaired  by  sin.  But  this  object 
the  sacrifices  provided  in  the  law  did  not  accomplish, 
being  intended  only  to  meet  the  case  of  sins  against  the 
Levitical  law,  not  against  the  moral  law.  In  the 
nature  of  things,  they  could  not  cleanse  from  sins 
against  the  moral  law,  being  only  the  blood  of  bulls 
and  goats,  material  things  which  could  not  cleanse 
spiritual  entities  ex  hypothesi.  Hence,  too,  also  ex 
hypothesi,  it  is  only  on  the  spiritual  side  of  it  that  the 
sacrifice  of  Christ  can  produce  this  spiritual  effect. 
When  the  writer  states  in  what  way  our  Lord's  death 
becomes  the  reality  of  which  the  Levitical  sacrifices 
were  the  mere  shadow,  it  is  in  the  words  of  the  Psalm, 
which  substitutes  obedience  to  the  divine  will  for  the 
sacrifice  of  the  law.  His  death  is  the  supreme  act  of 
obedience  by  which  he  himself  is  perfected,  and  so  is 
able  to  perfect  those  who  come  to  him.  This  is  to  the  The  ration- 
author  the  rationale  of  the  incarnation.  The  perfect-  fncarnatk)n. 
ing  of  the  imperfect  children  of  men  is  to  him  possible 
for  one  who  shares  their  human  imperfection,  but  not 
their  sin,  and  who  achieves  for  himself,  and  eventu- 
ally for  them,  completeness  out  of  this  incompleteness. 
But  this  sifting  of  the  Son  of  man  must  include,  also, 
the  suffering  which  comes  from  the  opposition  of  sin- 
ners, and  persecution  even  to  the  death,  since  without 
shedding  of  blood  there  is  no  remission  of  sins.  The 
rationale  of  the  incarnation  becomes  thus,  also,  that  of 
the  suffering  of  our  Lord.  Human  suffering,  the  oppo- 
sition of  men,  human  endurance  and  victory,  he  must 
share  to  the  uttermost,  if  he  would  achieve  that  com- 
pleteness out  of  incompleteness  which  makes  him  the 
purifier  of  sinful  men. 

This  view  of  the  atonement  is  different  from  Paul's.  Contrast 
Paul  thinks  of  it  as  a  vindication  of  the  Divine  right-  pau^nn^^doc- 
eousness,  by  which  that  righteousness  is  enabled  to  trine  of  the 
accomplish  its  purpose  of  effecting  a  righteousness  in 


atonement. 


172  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

men  that  God  can  accept.  The  sacrifice  of  our  Lord 
becomes  the  manifestation  of  the  Divine  care  for 
righteousness  by  which  the  appearance  of  laxness  and 
indifference  in  his  treatment  of  sinners  is  removed. 
But  in  this  epistle,  it  becomes  the  act  of  obedience 
which  takes  the  place  of  sacrifice  in  restoring  to  man 
his  lost  completeness.  An  expiatory  sacrifice  is  the 
provision  for  this  in  the  law.  But  the  prophetic  pro- 
vision, and  this  is  the  only  one  that  will  hold  in  the 
writer's  spiritual  philosophy,  is  not  a  material  sacri- 
fice, but  a  real  restoration  of  spiritual  completeness, 
a  restored  obedience.  And  to  this  end  there  is  given 
to  men  in  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  an  example  of  such 
complete  obedience  as  will  marshal  the  way  for  men 
to  the  same  achievement.  Christ  takes  hold  of  the 
work  of  restoration  just  where  the  priest  does ;  both 
suppose  the  attempt  to  return  on  the  part  of  man ; 
but  the  priest  says,  "  The  return  is  not  enough,  there 
must  be  an  expiation  of  man's  sin."  Christ  says: 
"  The  return  is  the  thing  wanted,  but  it  must  be  com- 
pleted, and  I  come  in  to  perfect  man's  imperfect  work. 
For  this  purpose,  I  imdertake  the  task  of  achieving 
that  righteousness  in  myself  under  the  same  condi- 
tions of  incompleteness,  and  temptation,  and  suffering 
for  righteousness'  sake  as  make  the  human  conditions 
of  this  undertaking,  and  by  bringing  completeness 
out  of  this  incompleteness  I  open  the  way  for  men  to 
achieve  the  same." 
Contrast  We  have  spoken  of  this  as  the  prophetic  view ;  and 

^etic  teach-  ^*  ^°®^  come  out  there  eventually.     But  there  is  this 
ing.  difference.     The  prophets  held  that  there  never  was 

a  divine  provision  for  sacrifice.^  And  our  Lord 
quotes  this  passage  from  Hosea  as  his  protest  against 
ceremonialism.*     This  epistle,  however,  considers  it 

1  Jer.  7 :  22  ;  Ps.  61 :  16  ;  Hos.  6:6. 
a  Matt.  9 :  13  ;  12 : 7. 


common  ele- 
ment in  the 


THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  HEBREWS  173 

necessary  to  set  up  an  elaborate  argument  to  show 
that  the  provision  of  sacrifice  in  the  old  covenant, 
by  the  ultimate  divine  enactment,  has  been  exchanged 
for  the  only  real  sacrifice.  It  is  interesting,  in  this  The 
connection,  to  notice  the  permanent  and  common  ele 
ment  in  the  New  Testament  writings.  In  Jesus  we  N.  T. :  —  the 
have  the  prophet,  the  culmination  of  the  line.  In  P'^P**®^'^- 
the  Twelve,  there  is  the  simplicity  that  characterises 
our  Lord,  but  mixed  with  an  apocalyptic  view  of  the 
future,  which  comes  of  their  misunderstanding  of 
him.  In  Paul  we  have  prophet  and  rabbi.  In  the 
writer  of  Hebrews  we  have  the  most  complete  exam- 
ple of  the  prophet  and  philosopher.  Thus  the  con- 
stant factor,  and  the  source  of  power  everywhere,  is 
the  prophetic  element,  the  power  of  spiritual  vision 
that  pervades  them  all. 


PART  VI 

THE  JOHAOEAN  WEITINGS 

CHAPTER  I 

THE  FOURTH  GOSPEL  AND  THE  SYNOPTICS 

The  real  The  question  in  regard  to  these  writings  is  not  so 

tionTsto^^  mucli  the  author  of  the  writings  themselves,  as  the 

tiiese  writ-  authorship  of  the  sayings  attributed  to  our  Lord  in 

'"^^'  the  fourth  Gospel.^    Compared  with  the  discourses 

1  On  the  authenticity,  date,  etc.,  of  this  gospel,  see  :  (1)  The 
Johannean  authorship  is  maintained  by  Godet,  Comm.  on  Gos- 
pel of  John;  Dodds,  "  Introduction,"  in  Uxpositor^s  Ghrk.  Test. ; 
Weiss,  Gospel  of  John  (Meyer  series);  Reynolds,  Art.  "Gospel 
of  John,"  Hastings'  Diet. ;  Weiss,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T., 
II,  355-401 ;  Salmon,  Introduction  to  the  N.  T.,  191-293  ;  Zahn, 
Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.,  II,  445-564  :  Gloag,  Introduction  to 
the  Johannean  Writings;  Hutton,  "The  Historical  Problems 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel,"  Theological  Essays,  166-240  ;  Watkins, 
"  Modern  Criticism  and  the  Fourth  Gospel,"  Bampton  Lectures, 
1890 ;  Abbot,  Peabody,  and  Lightfoot,  The  Fourth  Gospel ; 
Sanday,  Authorship  and  Historical  Character  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel;  Beyschlag,  Zur  Johanneischen  Frage;  P.  Ewald,  Das 
Hauptproblem  der  Evengelienfrage.  (2)  The  Johannean  author- 
ship is  denied  by  H.  Holtzmann,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T. ;  O. 
Holtzmann,  Das  Johannesevangelium  untersucht  und  erkliirt ; 
Martineau,  The  Seat  of  Authority  in  Belig.,  189-243;  Super- 
natural Beligion,  II,  251-492 ;  Thoma,  Die  Genesis  Joh. 
Evangel.,  171-302.  (3)  Mediating  hypotheses  are  maintained 
by  Renan,  Vie  de  Jesus;  Reuss,  Hist,  of  the  Christ.  Theol. 
in  the  Ap.  Age,  II,  381-375 ;  Sabatier,  Essai  sur  lea  Sources  de 
174 


Fourth  gospel  ANh  syi^optics     175 


of  Jesus  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels,  there  is  certainly 
a  note  of  strangeness  and  unfamiliarity  that  requires 
explanation. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  the  discourse  in  the  fourth 
Gospel  is  almost  wholly  of  our  Lord  himself,  a  dis- 
cussion of  his  claims,  and  a  defence  of  himself  for 
making  these  claims,  involving,  as  it  does,  self-witness. 

2.  It  is,  more  particularly,  a  statement  and  defence 
of  his  Messianic  claims,  which  are  in  evidence  from 
the  beginning,  whereas  Jesus  is  specially  reticent 
about  these  in  the  Synoptics,  only  opening  the  sub- 
ject in  the  inner  circle  of  his  disciples  in  the  last  few 
months  of  his  life,  and  making  the  public  claim  only 
in  the  last  week.  This  particular  reticence  is  har- 
monious with  the  general  impression  of  the  Synoptic 
account,  e.g.  with  the  silence  which  Jesus  imposes  on 
men  about  his  miracles,  indicating  a  fine  reserve,  and 
a  disposition  on  his  part  to  pursue  his  ends  as  silently, 
and  with  as  little  ostentation  and  self-display  as  pos- 
sible. It  is  the  intention  that  a  large  part  of  the 
impression  made  by  Jesus  should  be  the  result  of  his 
personality,  and  that  men  shall  be  brought  to  the 
acceptance  of  his  teachings  largely  as  a  part  of  the 
homage  paid  to  himself ;  but  the  whole  effect  depends 
upon  the  homage  being  entirely  unforced.  To  call 
Jesus  Messiah  as  your  own  discovery,  so  to  speak, 
is  a  tribute  which  the  mere  repetition  of  a  claim  made 
by  himself  never  equals. 

3.  The  abstract  quality  of  the  style  is  in  noticeable 


Contrasts 
between  the 
Johannean 
and  the 
Synoptic 
records  of 
the  sayings 
of  Jesus. 


la  Vie  de  Jesus,  les  trois  premiers  Evangiles  et  le  quatrieme ; 
Weizsacker,  Apostolic  Age,  II,  206-236 ;  "Wendt,  Die  Lehre 
Jesu,  I,  215-342 ;  Schiirer,  Contemporary  Review,  Sept.  1891  ; 
Burton,  "The  Purpose  and  Plan  of  the  Gospel  of  John,"  Bibli- 
cal World,  Jan.-Mch.  1899.  On  transpositions  in  the  gospel, 
see  Bacon,  Jour,  of  Bib.  Lit.,  1894,  pp.  64-76;  Spitta,  Zur 
Geschichte  und  Litteratur  des  Urchristentums,  I,  157-204. 


176  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

contrast  with  the  concreteness  of  the  Synoptical  dis- 
course. The  personal  element  in  Jesus  is  resolved 
into  abstractions,  such  as  life,  light,  or  elements,  such 
as  water  and  food.  The  concreteness  of  personality 
is  resolved  into  these  abstractions. 

4.  These  conceptions  are  dwelt  upon  with  a  con- 
tinual iteration  which  is  very  different  from  the  light 
touch,  the  tendency  to  suggestiveness  rather  than 
fulness  of  statement,  which  characterises  the  Synop- 
tical discourse. 

5.  This  difference  is  especially  noticeable  in  the 
treatment  of  the  parable  in  the  fourth  Gospel  and  the 
Synoptics.  The  parable  is  always  in  the  Synoptics 
an  analogy  suggested  by  something  in  Jesus'  dis- 
course, and  after  it  has  served  the  purpose  of  this 
illustration,  it  is  dropped,  while  in  the  fourth  Gospel 
it  is  explored  to  find  in  it  anything  in  which  the 
spiritual  and  material  facts  are  alike. 

6.  The  same  style  of  discourse  is  kept  up  in  the 
Gospel,  whoever  is  talking,  or  whoever  is  addressed. 
It  is  useless  to  allege  difference  of  auditors  in  the 
Synoptics  and  the  fourth  Gospel,  as  a  reason  for  the 
difference  of  discourse.  For  Jesus  in  this  Gospel 
uses  the  same  style  of  discourse  in  talking  with  the 
Samaritan  woman  as  with  the  scribe.  And  in  the 
Synoptics  he  never  falls  into  the  Johannean  style. 
Moreover,  when  John  the  Baptist  is  talking  in  the 
fourth  Gospel,  he  even  repeats  verbatim  the  discourse 
of  Jesus.^ 

7.  The  style  of  Jesus  in  the  fourth  Gospel  is  iden- 
tical with  that  of  the  first  epistle.  And  when  I 
speak  of  style,  I  mean  the  mental  peculiarities,  the 
way  of  looking  at  things,  and  not  simply  some  trick 
of  manner. 

»Jn.3:ll,  82-36,  18;  8:26;  13:8. 


FOURTH  GOSPEL  AND  SYNOPTICS        177 

On   the   other    hand,   certain    important    parallels  Parallels 
between  Jesus'  discourse  in  the  fourth  Gospel  and  two^ecords. 
the  Synoptics  are  to  be  noted. 

1.  The  prediction  of  our  Lord's  resurrection  after 
three  days.^  This  is  a  case  in  which  the  Synoptical 
discourse  and  the  Johannean  can  be  not  only  identi- 
fied, but  differentiated.  The  prediction  is  the  same 
in  both,  but  in  the  one  it  comes  when  the  pressure  of 
events  at  the  end  of  Christ's  ministry  led  naturally 
to  the  prophecy,  while  in  John  it  comes  at  the  very 
beginning  of  the  ministry. 

2.  The  doctrine  of  the  new  birth.*  This  teaching, 
so  evidently  figurative  in  this  passage,  has  been  so 
literalised  in  Christian  dogma  that  its  connection 
with  our  Lord's  teaching  has  been  quite  obscured. 
But  we  find  in  the  Synoptics  the  same  teaching  of 
the  necessity  of  a  radical  change  to  fit  a  man  for  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.^  The  difference  is,  that  in  John 
the  change  is  carried  back  so  far  as  to  make  it  no 
longer  the  act  of  man,  but  of  God.  This  is  quite  in 
accordance  with  the  Johannean  teaching  of  the  radical 
defect  of  human  nature,  contrasted  with  the  Synoptic 
view  of  the  fundamental  fitness  of  humanity  for  the 
truth,  and  the  superficial  nature  of  the  obstacles.  The 
hidden  character  of  the  process  by  which  this  change 
is  accomplished  is  also  common  to  both  records.*  The 
seat  of  the  evil  which  necessitates  the  change  is  the 
same  in  both  the  Synoptics  and  the  fourth  Gospel. 
But  the  flesh  in  the  Synoptics  is  simply  the  physical 
part  of  man,  with  its  observed  tendency  to  temptation 
on  the  side  of  its  appetites  and  passions,  while  in  the 
fourth  Gospel  it  is  characterised  by  the  radical  evil  of 
matter.* 


1  2  :  19-22.  2  3:3-8.  «  Matt.  18  : 2-4. 

«  Jn.3:8;  Mk.4:27.  «Mk.l4:38;  Jn.  3:6. 

M 


178  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

3.  The  spirituality  of  true  worship.^  This  passage 
has  no  exact  parallel  in  the  Synoptics.  But  the  pro- 
test against  unspirituality,  the  elevation  of  spirit  above 
form,  pervades  all  the  Synoptic  teaching.^ 

4.  The  change  from  light  to  darkness  in  men.'  The 
idea  is  in  both  that  originally  man  is  made  receptive 
of  the  truth,  but  that  his  spiritual  faculty  may  be 
changed,  so  that  he  shall  dwell  in  darkness  rather 
than  light.  The  difference  is  that  in  the  Synoptics 
this  change  is  never  predicted  of  the  world  at  large, 
which  remains  susceptible  to  the  truth  for  the  most 
part ;  while  in  the  fourth  Gospel  this  change  remains 
the  ultimate  fact  about  mankind. 

5.  Jesus'  treatment  of  the  Sabbath  is  evidently  free 
in  this  Gospel,  as  in  the  Synoptics.  The  statement 
in  the  latter  is  that  the  Son  of  man  is  Lord  of  the 
Sabbath.  This  is  the  teaching  also  of  Jn.  5,  where 
Jesus  claims  the  same  liberty  to  work  continuously, 
without  the  interruption  of  the  Sabbath,  as  the  Father 
undoubtedly  exercises. 

6.  Jesus  claims  to  be  the  judge  of  men  in  John,  as 
in  the  Synoptics.  Only  here  this  claim  is  rationalised, 
while  in  the  other  Gospels  it  is  simply  stated.  It  is 
here  a  part  of  the  general  teaching  in  regard  to  the 
relation  between  himself  and  the  Father,  claiming 
authority  not  to  act  for  himself,  which  he  never  does, 
but  to  represent  the  Father  in  such  divine  functions, 
because  he  knows  the  Father's  will  so  perfectly.'* 

7.  That  Jesus  is  the  bread  of  life,  his  flesh  true 
food,  and  his  blood  what  we  must  drink  for  eternal 
life,  is  to  be  identified  with  the  words  of  institution 
of  the  Lord's  Supper,  "  This  is  my  body,  and  this  is 

1  4  :  23,  24. 

2  Matt.  6  : 1-18  ;  9  :  13  ;  12  :  l-«  ;  15 : 1-20  ;  23  : 1-33  ;  Mk. 
2  :  18-3  :  5  ;  Lk.  10  :  29-37  ;  11  :  37-42  ;  13  :  24-30. 

»  Matt.  6  :  22,  23.  *  Jn.  6  :  27-30. 


FOURTH  GOSPEL  AND  SYNOPTICS        179 

my  blood."  Only,  the  fact  figured  in  the  Sacrament 
is  that  Jesus  is  the  food  of  the  soul  by  virtue  of  his 
death  simply,  whereas  in  the  passage  in  John  this 
significance  of  his  death  is  made  a  part  of  the  general 
fact,  that  as  a  teacher  and  revealer  of  God  he  is  the 
living  bread.^ 

8.  It  is  not  stated  in  the  Synoptics,  that  Jesus  is 
the  light  of  men,  but  he  does  tell  his  disciples  that 
they  are  the  light  of  the  world,  the  salt  of  the  earth,'^ 
establishing  the  general  fact  that  grace  is  communi- 
cated from  man  to  man,  that  this  is  the  method  by 
which  the  kingdom  of  God  grows  and  advances.  And 
this  fact  once  established,  of  course  Jesus  becomes 
the  example  of  it,  par  excellence. 

9.  Both  the  Synoptics  and  John  contain  teaching 
to  the  effect  that  misfortunes  of  one  kind  and  another 
are  not  necessarily  the  result  of  the  sufferer's  sin.^  In 
fact,  both  teach  that  in  an  evil  world  it  is  the  good 
who  suffer,  that  this  suffering  is  the  condition  of  the 
triumph  of  their  cause,  and  that  hating  the  present 
life  is  the  way  to  gain  the  life  eternal.* 

10.  Jesus'  teaching  in  this  Gospel,  that  blindness 
excuses  sin,  and  that  knowledge  creates  responsibility, 
is  paralleled  in  the  Synoptics  by  the  comparison  be- 
tween the  men  of  Jesus'  generation  and  the  Ninevites, 
and  the  denunciations  of  the  cities  in  which  Jesus  did 
his  miracles.* 

11.  Jesus'  use  of  the  shepherd's  care  of  the  sheep 
to  illustrate  the  watchfulness  and  self-sacrifice  with 
which  lost  men  are  sought,  and  the  members  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  are  cared  for,  is  substantially  the 
same  in  the  Synoptics  and  John.^ 

1  Jn.  6 :  48-51.  »  Jn.  9  : 1-3  ;  Lk.  13  : 1-5. 

2  Matt.  5 :  13,  14.  *  Jn.  12  :  20-32  ;  Mk.  8  :  31-38. 
6  Mt.  9 :  41,  42  ;  11  :  20-24  ;  Ju.  9 :  39-41. 

6  Jn.  10 :  11-18 ;  Lk.  15  : 1-7. 


180  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

12.  Jesus'  teaching  in  connection  with  his  washing 
the  feet  of  his  disciples  has  an  interesting  parallel  in 
Lk.  12 :  37.  But  in  general,  this  is  one  of  the  most 
distinct  lines  of  separation  between  the  Synoptics  and 
the  fourth  Gospel.  In  the  latter  Jesus  uses  the  most 
solemn  occasion  to  impress  on  his  disciples  love  to  each 
other  as  their  most  sacred  duty,  while  in  the  Synoptics 
he  dwells  on  their  love  to  all  men,  but  especially  their 
enemies,  and  even  expressly  belittles  love  of  each 
other  compared  to  this.^ 

13.  Jesus'  teaching  in  regard  to  the  identification 
of  himself  with  his  disciples  on  the  one  hand,  and 
with  God  on  the  other,  is  paralleled  in  the  Synop- 
tics.'^ The  identification  is  the  same  in  both  cases,  an 
identity  of  interests,  which  leads  a  person  to  regard  a 
favour  done  to  a  friend  as  done  to  him. 

14.  Jesus'  teaching  in  regard  to  his  death,  that  it  is 
the  inevitable  result  of  the  opposition  of  the  world, 
and  that  his  followers,  therefore,  need  expect  nothing 
different,  is  common  to  all  four  Gospels.  It  is  the 
necessary  condition  of  his  glorification,  being  the 
crowning  evidence  of  the  spirit  of  meekness  and  self- 
sacrifice  which  he  makes  the  special  mark  of  the 
kingdom.^ 

15.  Jesus'  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  it  is  the 
divine  illuminator  of  both  himself  and  his  disciples, 
and  the  communicator  of  the  divine  power  to  them 
both,  is  developed  at  greater  length  in  the  fourth 
Gospel,  but  is  found  also  in  the  Synoptics.* 

16.  There  is  a  broad  line  of  distinction  between  the 
Synoptics  and  John  in  the  matter  of  faith  and  works, 

1  Matt.  5 :  46,  47.  *  Jn.  13  :  26  ;  Mk.  9  :  37. 

»  Jn.  13  :  31,  32  ;  15  :  18-21  ;  16  :  1-3  ;  18  :  36  ;  Mk.  8  :  29-38 ; 
9:33-37;  10:33-45. 

*  Jn.  14  :  16-21,  26  ;  15  :  26  ;  16  :  7-16  ;  Matt.  3  :  11,  16  ;  4  : 1 ; 
10:20;  12:18,28,31,32. 


FOURTH  GOSPEL  AND  SYNOPTICS        181 

the  one  insisting  on  obedience  as  the  final  qualification 
for  discipleship,  or  membership  in  the  kingdom,  while 
the  other  dwells  more  on  faith  in  Jesus.  But  neyer- 
theless,  both  hold  that  the  profession  of  discipleship 
is  attested  only  by  keeping  our  Lord's  commands.^ 

1  Jn.  15  : 9,  10 ;  Matt.  7  :  21-23. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING 

It  is  needless  to  say  that  the  principal  subject  of 
discourse  in  this  Gospel  ^  is  our  Lord  himself,  and  the 
object  is  evidently  to  prove  his  Messiahship.  This  is 
definitely  stated  in  20 :  31,  and  it  is  meant  in  several 
places  where  it  is  not  definitely  stated.  Wherever 
Jesus  says,  "  I  am  he,"  the  reference  is  of  course  to 
something  understood  between  himself  and  his  hearers, 
and  what  this  is,  is  indicated  in  the  verse  above  quoted. 
It  is  quite  after  the  style  of  this  Gospel  to  impart  a 
certain  mystery  to  its  discourse  by  the  use  of  the  more 
or  less  vague  pronoun,  instead  of  the  intelligible  noun. 
But  when  the  verse  quoted  adds  to  "  Christ "  the  "  Son 
of  God,"  that  has  a  meaning  different  from  the  same 

1  See  in  addition  :  Stevens,  Theology  of  the  N.  T.,  564-592  ; 
Stevens,  Johannine  Theology ,  Beyschlag,  New  Testament  The- 
ology, II,  408-475  ;  Weiss,  Theology  of  the  N.  T,  II,  311-421 ; 
Holtzmann,  Netitestamentliche  Theologie,  II,  351-521 ;  Bovon, 
Theologie  du  N.  T.,  II,  639-588  ;  Reuss,  Hist,  of  the  Christ. 
Theol.  in  Ap.  Age.,  II,  375-505  ;  Horton,  Bevelation  and  Bible, 
369-402 ;  Horton,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus,  155-282 ;  Caird, 
Evolution  of  Religion,  II,  217-243  ;  Alexander,  Leading  Ideas 
of  the  Gospels,  182-236 ;  Van  Oosterzee,  Theology  of  the  N.  T., 
129-176,  372-405;  Wendt,  Teaching  of  Jesus  (see  index); 
Gilbert,  Bevelation  of  Jesus  (see  index)  ;  Baldensperger,  Der 
Prolog  des  vierten  Evangeliums  ;  Harnack,  "  Ueber  das  Verhalt- 
niss  des  Prologs  des  vierten  Evangeliums  ziiin  ganzen  Werk," 
Zeit.f  Th.  u.  Kirche,  1892,  189-231  ;  Holtzmann,  "Der  Logos 
und  der  eingeborene  Gottessohn  im  vierten  Evangelium,"  Zeit. 
/.  wissen.  Theol,  1893,  386-407. 

182 


THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACUING  183 

term  in  the  Synoptics  and  the  Acts.  The  two  are  en- 
tirely synonymous  in  these  writings,  but  in  this  Gospel 
the  term  "  Son  of  God  "  has  the  additional  meaning 
given  to  it  by  Alexandrianism.  The  Son  of  God  is  an 
incarnation  of  the  Alexandrian  Logos.  It  is  in  the  The  Logos. 
Prologue  that  we  find  Alexandrianism  proper,  but  there 
is  also  there  the  statement  of  the  incarnation  of  the 
Logos,  which  is  the  Christian  addition  to  Alexandrian- 
ism.^ The  Gospel  itself  says  nothing  further  about 
the  Alexandrian  philosopy,  but  the  divinity  of  the  Son 
of  God  in  the  Gospel  is  that  of  the  incarnate  Logos. 
The  proof  that  the  Logos  of  the  Prologue  is  the  Alex- 
andrian Logos  is  that  the  Word  is  here  hypostatised, 
whereas,  in  the  passages  of  the  Old  Testament  where 
creation  is  said  to  be  by  the  Word  of  God,  or  where 
Wisdom  is  represented  as  speaking,  the  nearest  ap- 
proach to  this  is  personification,  a  mere  figure  of 
speech.  But  in  Alexandrianism  the  thought  of  God 
is  made  the  actual  agent  in  creation,  and  is  hyposta- 
tised, not  personified.  The  statement  of  this  in  the 
Prologue  combines  exactness  with  poetical  elevation 
of  expression.'  "  In  the  beginning,"  of  course  means 
before  creation,  as  creation  is  attributed  to  the  agency 
of  the  Word.  The  two  statements,  that  the  Word 
was  with  God,  and  was  God,  are  reconciled  by  the  dif- 
ferentiation of  6eos  in  the  two.  In  the  "  with  God " 
6'eos  is  written  with  the  article,  and  in  the  "  was  God," 
without  the  article.  This  specialises  the  first  as  the 
one  to  whom  the  name  belongs  by  preeminence,  and 
generalises  the  second  as  belonging  in  the  same  class 
as  God,  partaking  of  his  nature.  This  is  quite  in 
keeping  Avith  the  philosophy,  the  terms  of  which  are 
used  in  this  statement.  The  statement  about  creation, 
especially,  identifies  this  book  with  Alexandrianism, 

1  Jn.  1 :  14.  a  1 : 1-14. 


184 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  Logos 
aud  crea- 
tion. 


The  incarna- 
tion of  the 
Logos. 


as  it  is  principally  in  creation  that  the  agency  of  the 
Logos  is  employed,  and  that  he  becomes  identified 
with  God.  But  it  is  in  what  follows  that  the  thought 
changes  from  the  general  Alexandrianism  which  it 
shares  with  other  writings,  to  the  peculiar  elevation  of 
thought  characteristic  of  this  Gospel.  The  creative 
agency  of  the  Logos  is  here  characterised  as  vital,  not 
mechanical.  If  we  insert  the  connecting  thought,  it 
reads :  This  agency  in  creation  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  Logos  has  life  in  himself.  The  thought  mounts 
still  higher  in  the  next  clause,  which  states  that  what 
was  life  in  the  rest  of  creation  becomes  light  in  the 
case  of  men.  That  is,  life  in  general  becomes  here 
the  special  life  which  belongs  to  man,  intelligence  and 
spiritual  nature. 

But  as  we  have  seen,  the  peculiarity  of  Christian 
Alexandrianism  is  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos.  "  The 
Word  became  flesh."  This  does  not  denote  enshrine- 
ment  of  the  Logos  in  a  human  body,  but  the  humanis- 
ing of  the  Logos.  And  it  is  evident  that  this  includes 
the  shrinkage  of  the  Logos  to  the  spiritual  dimensions 
of  humanity.  For  wherever  supernaturalism  is  attrib- 
uted to  our  Lord,  it  is  said  to  be  due,  not  to  the  Logos 
with  which  he  is  identified,  but  to  the  Father  or  Spirit, 
as  in  the  case  of  other  men.  At  the  beginning  of  his 
ministry  this  Gospel,  like  the  Synoptics,  represents  the 
Spirit  as  abiding  on  him.^  He  that  receives  his  testi- 
mony has  put  his  seal  on  this,  that  God  is  true,  be- 
cause God  gives  not  the  Spirit  by  measure.^  So  he 
is  incessant  in  his  declaration  that  his  teaching  was 
not  his  own,  but  his  who  sent  him.^  His  authority 
to  lay  down  life  and  take  it  again  is  a  Commandment 
received  from  his  Father.*  The  Son  does  what  the 
Father  shows  him,*  and  what  the  Father  commands.* 


M  :  32,  33. 
2  3:34. 


«  7  :  16  ;  8  :  26  ;  12  :  49,  60. 
4  10 :  18. 


6  5  :  19,  20. 
6  14:  31. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING  185 

He  has  life  in  himself,  by  which  is  meant  power  to 
impart  life,  but  it  comes  from  the  Father,  with  whom 
this  power  originally  rests.^  This  involves  judgment, 
but  this  also  comes  from  the  Father ;  the  Son  judges 
as  he  hears.^  When  he  announces  that  his  flesh 
is  true  food,  he  bases  it  on  the  fact  that  the  living 
Father  sent  him,  and  he  lives  because  of  the  Father.' 
The  proof  that  he  is  the  Son  of  God  is  the  works  of 
the  Father,  which  show  the  Father  in  him.*  At  the 
resurrection  of  Lazarus,  he  thanks  the  Father  for 
hearing  him.* 

But  there  is  one  element  in  this  human  life  which  The  pre- 
is  entirely  peculiar  to  this  Gospel.  While  the  life  is  human^iife 
thus  human,  owing  its  peculiar  qualities  to  divine 
reenforcements  that  are  not  part  of  itself,  at  the  same 
time  our  Lord  has  a  memory  of  his  heavenly  exist- 
ence. His  knowledge  of  heavenly  things  is  not  an 
intuition,  but  a  memory.  There  is  no  veil  between 
the  two  lives ;  the  consciousness  is  continuous.^  John 
the  Baptist  makes  this  the  difference  between  himself 
and  Jesus.  His  origin  was  earthly,  and  as  such  he 
speaks  from  the  earth.  That  is,  his  knowledge  of 
heavenly  things  would  be  due  to  inspiration,  or  intui- 
tion, like  the  astronomer's  knowledge  of  Saturn  when 
he  had  calculated  its  existence.  But  Jesus'  knowledge 
was  what  he  had  seen  and  heard,  the  knowledge  of 
the  planet  given  him  by  the  telescope.^  At  the  same 
time,  this  is  connected  with  the  other  knowledge.  It 
is  in  this  very  passage  that  his  knowledge  of  the 
things  of  God  is  attributed  to  the  unstinted  gift  of 
the  Spirit.* 

This  means  that  man,  qua  man,  even  supposing  that 
he  is  the  incarnate  Logos,  would  have  no  such  memory ; 
the  veil  would  be  there ;  else  there  would  be  no  incar- 

15:21-29.  86:57.  6  11: 41.         73.31,32. 

2  5:21,22,30.        *  10: 37,  38.       63.13.  83:34, 


186  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

nation.  But  the  Spirit  would  bring  to  him  the  knowl- 
edge of  heavenly  things,  as  to  other  inspired  men. 
And  he  would  recognise  it'  as  something  he  had 
known  before,  which  other  men  would  not.  Omni- 
science would  not  result,  therefore,  but  such  verification 
of  his  intuitions  as  would  come  from  his  recognition 
of  them  as  parts  of  a  previous  consciousness. 

The  equality       This  writing  claims  for  Jesus  equality  with  God. 

with^God!^  This  claim  rests  on  his  calling  God  tov  Trarcpa  iStov,  that 
is.  Father  in  the  proper  sense,  involving  divinity,  as 
paternity  always  involves  transmission  of  generic 
quality.^  Animal  begets  animal,  man  begets  man, 
God  begets  a  divine  Son.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  this  sonship  rests  on  an  incarnation,  and  that  this 
involves  modification  of  the  general  thought. 

1.  It  is  not  the  Father,  primary  source  of  all  things, 
who  is  incarnated,  but  the  Logos,  who  becomes  the 
divine  agent  in  creation,  the  One  through  whom  all 
things  came  to  be,  and  who  is  himself  derived  from 
God,  an  hypostatising  of  the  divine  thought. 

2.  In  the  incarnation  the  Logos  is  humanised,  so 
that  his  representation  of  the  Father  in  being,  spirit, 
and  act,  is  not  attributed  to  the  incarnation  of  the 
Logos,  but  to  the  indwelling  of  Father  and  Spirit,  as 
in  the  case  of  other  inspired  men.  But  now,  inasmuch 
as  this  capacity  for  God  is  characteristic  of  men  as 
such,  the  incarnation  procures  for  Jesus  the  perfec- 
tion of  his  humanity. 

Therefore,  when  he  is  charged  with  making  himself 
God,  his  answer  does  not  justify  the  assertion  of  divin- 
ity in  the  unqualified  sense  in  which  his  enemies 
attributed  it  to  him,  but  is  to  the  effect  that  he  asserts 
it  of  himself  only  in  the  qualified  sense  in  which  it  is 
not  blasphemy.     The  Old  Testament  calls  the  rulers 

1  5 :  18. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING  187 

of  the  people  gods,  on  the  ground  that  they,  being 
rulers  under  a  theocracy,  represented  God ;  they  were 
men  to  whom  the  word  of  God  came,  making  them 
administrators  of  a  divine  law.^  Jesus,  on  the  con- 
trary, had  been  consecrated  and  sent  into  the  world,  . 
and  represented  God,  therefore,  in  a  sense  which  they 
did  not.  They  were  ofB.cial  members  of  a  theocracy 
and  represented  God  as  the  administrators  of  a  divine 
law:  he  was  personally  consecrated  to  his  work  by 
God  himself,  and  commissioned  by  him.  And  yet  he 
had  called  himself  only  Son  of  God,  whereas  they, 
with  their  merely  official  claim  to  divine  authority 
were  called  gods.  The  thing  that  he  claims  for  him-  Jesus  as  the 
self  here,  as  justifying  himself  to  be  God's  own  Son,  ^^^  ^^  ^*^^" 
was  this  fact,  that  he  represented  God.  He  stood  to 
men  for  God.  This  is  essential  to  an  understanding 
of  his  position,  for  this  is  not  an  isolated  statement, 
but  is  insisted  on  wherever  this  matter  of  his  claim 
comes  up.  There  is  no  mention  of  the  Logos  as  the 
source  of  his  divinity,  but  of  the  fact  that  the  in- 
dwelling of  the  Father  in  his  humanity  made  what- 
ever he  did  and  was  divine.^  This  makes  the  seeing 
of  him  and  of  the  Father  to  be  one  and  the  same 
thing.  It  is  not  a  concession,  but  a  claim,  that  his 
teaching  is  not  his  own,  but  the  Father's.  Indepen- 
dence is  what  has  been  claimed  for  him  here,  but  he 
considers  that  any  approach  to  this  would  derogate 
from  his  claim,  instead  of  enhancing  it.^ 

The  comprehensive  answer  of  this  Gospel  to  the  The  work  of 
question  as  to  what  Jesus  does  for  men,  is  that  he  °^^  ^'^*^' 
gives  them  life.    This  is  in  accordance  with  the  state- 
ment of  his  creative  work,  which  is  attributed  to  the 
life  which  he  has  in  himself.*    This  life  is  both  spirit- 
ual and  physical.     The  main  statement  of  it  is  in  5 : 

110:33-38.  «  7  :  16;  8  :26  ;  12:49-60. 

2  10  :  33-38.  *  1 : 4. 


188 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Eternal  life 
vs.  immor- 
tality. 


Sonship  as 
the  condi- 
tion of  faith. 


21-30,  and  in  this  passage  verses  21-26,  inasmucli  as 
they  make  the  bestowment  of  this  life  depend  on  an  act 
of  judgment,  refer  to  the  spiritual  life;  but  verses 
27-28  denote  a  universal  resurrection,  which  is  evi- 
dently physical,  because  indiscriminate.  But  in  other 
passages,  the  rising  up  at  the  last  day  is  treated  as 
the  fiual  step  in  the  bestowment  of  eternal  life,  and  is 
restricted  to  believers.^ 

This  conferring  of  life  after  death  upon  all,  while 
resurrection  and  the  eternal  life  are  restricted  to 
believers,  is  coincident  with  the  Pauline  statement. 
But  in  order  to  understand  the  predominance  of  the 
spiritual  element  in  this  life  bestowed  by  Jesus,  we 
have  to  recur  to  the  statement  of  the  Prologue,  that 
the  life-giving  power  resident  in  the  Logos  was  the 
light  of  men,  meaning  the  source  of  the  higher  life 
which  distinguishes  man  from  the  brute,  the  faculties 
of  reason,  judgment,  intuition,  moral  sense,  apprehen- 
sion of  God,  and  the  like.  That  Jesus  is  the  life  of  men 
means,  therefore,  that  he  has  the  power  of  quickening 
these  dormant  faculties. 

This  statement,  that  the  process  is  one  of  spiritual 
renovation,  implying  the  death  or  dormancy  of  the 
previous  state,  is  the  meaning  of  the  passage  in  regard 
to  the  new  birth,^  and  of  the  passage  which  treats  of 
Jesus  as  having  life  in  himself.^  But  owing  to  the 
peculiar  philosophy  of  this  book,  this  doctrine,  so 
radical  if  we  take  it  at  its  face  value,  becomes  very 
much  modified.  According  to  this  philosophy,  Jesus 
becomes  a  test  of  man's  affinity  for  the  truth,  and 
belief  in  him,  which  is  the  condition  of  eternal  life 
bestowed  by  him,  is  possible  only  in  those  who  are 
already  children  of  light.  There  are  various  names 
for  these  contrasted  states  which  produce  belief  or 


16:39,40,44. 


«  3-:  3-9. 


«  6 : 21-27. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING  189 

unbelief.  Men  are,  for  example,  children  either  of 
God  or  the  devil ;  of  light  or  darkness.  Or  more  con- 
cretely, they  are  doers  of  good  or  evil.^  This  is  pre- 
cisely the  opposite  of  the  ordinary  Christian  truth, 
that  belief  in  Jesus  makes  men  sons  of  light  or  dark- 
ness. The  doctrine  of  this  Gospel  is  that  the  sonship 
produces  the  belief,  instead  of  the  belief  the  sonship. 
In  like  manner,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  part  of  whose 
work  is  to  convince  the  world,  the  world  cannot 
receive,  because  it  does  not  behold  or  know  him.^ 
Men  who  are  of  the  truth  hear  his  voice.  All  this 
might  be  taken  as  meaning  that  men  must  be  changed 
before  they  believe.  But  the  passage  which  makes 
the  condition  of  belief  doing  ill  or  doing  truth, 
removes  this  possibility.  No,  the  evident  teaching  Pre-Chris- 
is  that  previous  to  Christ's  coming  there  were  other  eJfc°g"or " 
like  agencies,  such,  for  example,  as  the  law,  or  the  good. 
Greek  philosophy,  which  divided  men  into  classes, 
disclosing  in  them  affinities  either  for  good  or  evil, 
and  that  when  Christ  came  with  the  fulness  of  light, 
men  were  drawn  to  him,  or  repelled  from  him,  accord- 
ing to  their  previous  attitude  toward  the  dimmer 
light  that  preceded  him.  This  is  very  different 
from  the  anthropology  of  the  parables,  according  to 
which  human  nature  as  such  has  this  affinity  for  the 
truth.  It  is  another  reading  of  the  parable  of  the 
sower  and  of  the  tares,  which  deals  with  the  second- 
ary truth  that  there  are  differences  among  men  which 
determine  their  present  attitude  toward  the  truth. 
The  difference  between  the  two  is  that  the  one  goes 
on  to  the  ultimate  fact  of  the  essential  aptitude  of 
humanity  for  the  truth  which  the  other  denies. 

Under  this  general  head,  that  the  gift  which  Jesus 
has  to  bestow  is  life,  come  those  passages  which  com- 

1  8  :  19-21 ;  8 :  38-47.  »  14  :  17. 


190 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Jesus  the 
nourish- 
ment of 
eternal  life. 


pare  him  to  the  various  elements  which  feed  life.  He 
is  the  bread  of  life/  the  light  of  life.'  He  is  the  vine, 
of  which  the  disciples  are  the  branches.'  It  is  a  curi- 
ous turn  which  is  given  to  the  statement  that  he  is 
the  bread  of  life,  that,  instead  of  allowing  this  to 
remain  as  a  general  figurative  statement  of  his  min- 
istering to  the  spiritual  life  of  men,  he  explains  it  of 
his  flesh,  which  he  will  give  for  the  life  of  the  world. 
In  all  probability  this  refers  to  the  sacrament  of  the 
Lord's  Supper.  Its  relation  to  the  words  of  institution, 
"  This  is  my  body,"  and  "  This  is  the  new  covenant  in 
my  blood,"  is  too  obvious  to  be  set  aside.  And  this 
being  the  case,  there  are  two  parts  of  its  exposition 
of  the  sacrament  which  command  attention.  The 
first  is  the  emphasis  of  the  fact  that  the  sacrament 
is  a  ritual  embodiment  of  the  general  truth  that  Jesus 
is,  especially  in  his  death,  the  food  of  the  spirit.  His 
death  is  not,  according  to  this,  a  sacrificial  appease- 
ment, a  satisfaction  for  sin,  in  which  case  the  eating 
and  drinking  would  be  out  of  place.  But,  as  the 
supreme  good  of  life  is  to  be  found  in  self-sacrifice,* 
Jesus  becomes,  by  this  supreme  act  of  self-sacrifice, 
the  inspiration  of  the  spiritual  life,  to  which  this 
gives  the  key.  The  second  fact  is  brought  out  in  the 
statement  which  translates  the  eating  and  drinking 
into  faith."  There  is,  therefore,  nothing  magical 
about  the  elements,  which  makes  the  mere  eating  a 
means  of  grace,  but  the  benefit  depends  on  the  faith 
of  which  the  eating  and  drinking  are  signs.  As  when 
we  speak  of  drinking  in  beauty  or  truth,  or  say  of 
anything  satisfying  that  it  is  meat  and  drink,  so  we 
speak  of  eating  and  drinking  of  our  Lord's  self-sac- 
rifice. 
This  accords  strictly  with  everything  that  is  said 


1  6 :  32-69. 

2  8 :  12. 


»  15 : 1-8. 
«  12  :  24,  26. 


6  6:35. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING  191 

in  this  book  regarding  the  death  of  our  Lord.  There  The  death  of 
is  absolutely  nothing  implying  divine  appeasement,  *'^^"^- 
while  there  is  much  which  places  the  death  of  Jesus 
among  the  things  which  contribute  to  the  spiritual 
life  of  man.  For  example,  in  the  passage  just 
quoted,  the  reason  alleged  why  the  flesh  of  the  Son 
of  man  is  true  food,  is  that  he  has  life  in  himself, 
just  as  the  Father  has  life  in  himself,  that  is,  a  crea- 
tive life,  and  in  the  case  of  man  a  life  which  is  light.  ^ 
So,  when  Jesus  sees  in  the  application  of  the  Greeks 
to  see  him  a  sign  that  the  time  has  come  for  his  glori- 
fication, and  that  the  glorification  is  to  be  through 
his  death,  the  fact  is  put  on  the  same  general  ground 
as  in  the  Synoptical  discussion,  viz.  that  to  lose  one's 
life  is  the  only  way  to  save  it.*  It  becomes  thus  a 
general  principle,  which  brings  his  death  under  the 
common  laws  affecting  human  life,  and  not  into  a  class 
by  itself.  He  makes  his  cross,  not  that  by  which 
God  is  to  be  appeased,  but  by  which  men  are  to  be 
attracted.' 

The  condition  of  this  spiritual  life  is  faith.  This  Faith  the 
is,  primarily,  belief  in  Jesus  himself.*  But  the  reason  ^^Jg'^/j'/e  °  '*' 
alleged  for  this  belief,  and  other  statements  about  it, 
are  such  as  to  emphasise  the  correspondence  of  Jesus 
with  the  eternal  truth  of  things,  and  so  make  faith  a 
spiritual  act,  drawn  forth  by  the  power  of  truth  to 
command  belief.  The  result  of  abiding  in  his  word, 
by  which  is  meant  a  persistent  belief  in  him,  is  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth,  and  the  truth  sets  free.*  He  that 
is  of  the  truth  hears  his  voice.®  On  the  other  hand, 
because  he  speaks  the  truth  men  do  not  believe  him, 
and  they  are  of  the  devil,  who  is  a  liar  from  the 
beginning.^  Spiritual  affinities  decide  both  ways. 
The  same  thing  is  expressed  figuratively  when  belief 

11:3,4.  8  12:32.  6  8:31-36.  '8:43-45. 

2  12  :  23-26.        *  3  :  16-21.        «  18  :  37. 


192  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

in  Jesus  is  identified  with  coming  to  the  light.*  They 
are  exhorted,  while  they  have  light  to  believe  in  the 
light ;  and  he  has  come,  a  light,  that  they  who  believe 
may  not  walk  in  darkness.*  On  still  another  side, 
belief  is  identified  with  appropriation  of  spiritual 
food.^  All  this  connects  together  not  only  belief  and 
reason,  but  also  faith  and  its  results.  The  effect  of 
faith  is  almost  invariably  eternal  life.*  But  this  con- 
nection between  faith  and  light,  spiritual  food  and 
the  like,  means  that  it  introduces  them  to  those  agen- 
cies which  produce  and  sustain  this  life.  On  still 
another  side,  faith  recognises  a  representative  side  of 
our  Lord's  manifestation.  Belief  in  him  is  belief  in 
God.  He  who  believes  in  him  has  put  his  seal  on 
this,  that  God  is  true,  because  he  whom  God  has  sent 
speaks  the  words  of  God."  It  is  the  one  who  hears 
his  word  and  believes  on  him  who  sent  him,  who  has 
eternal  life."  The  work  of  God  is  to  believe  on  him 
whom  he  sent.^ 
Faith  the  It  is  an  indication  of  the  difference  between  the 

work  of  Synoptical  and  the  Johannean  point  of  view,  that  the 
fourth  Gospel  declares  that  the  work  of  God  is  to 
believe  on  him  whom  he  has  sent.*  It  is  the  difference 
between  the  personal  and  impersonal  bent  of  the  one 
and  the  other.  The  subject  of  the  one  is  the  kingdom 
of  God,  and  of  the  other  our  Lord  himself.  Whenever 
belief  is  spoken  of  in  the  Synoptics,  it  is  belief  in  the 
glad  tidings  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  But  the  spiritual 
act  which  harmonises  best  with  the  idea  of  the  king- 
dom is  not  faith,  but  obedience.  To  be  subjects  of  the 
kingdom  is  the  idea  that  it  presents  of  human  life. 
And  this  is  what  the  Synoptics  emphasise.    It  is,  to 


13:15-21,32-36. 

6  3 :  31-56. 

«  12  :  36,  46. 

6  5  :  24  ;  17  :  8. 

»  6  :  26  sq. 

T  6  :  29. 

♦3:15,  16,36;  6:40,47. 

8  6  :  29. 

THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING  193 

be  sure,  an  obedience  which  is  both  inward  and  out- 
ward, but  primarily  inward;  but  the  essential  idea  is 
obedience ;  the  standard  is  law. 

On  the  other  hand,  with  the  personal  subject  of  the  The  natural- 
fourth  Gospel,  faith  becomes  the  equally  natural  de-  ^^^^^  *"^"- 
mand.  Jesus  appears  making  a  claim,  which  is  in 
debate  from  beginning  to  end  of  the  book,  and  his 
demand  is  therefore  belief.  There  can  be  no  doubt  of 
the  relative  importance  of  the  two.  Belief  is  the  in- 
spiration of  goodness,  and  when  it  is  complete,  its  sure 
fruit  is  goodness.  But  it  is  not  itself  goodness.  It 
needs  to  add  to  itself  other  qualities  before  it  eventuates 
in  goodness.  And  it  is  the  goodness  itself  that  is  the 
real  goal,  the  ultimate  divine  command.  This  is  ap- 
parent from  the  relative  position  of  faith  and  love  in 
the  Christian  scheme,  even  as  expounded  by  Paul. 
Faith,  hope,  and  love  are  to  him  the  things  that  abide, 
and  the  greatest  of  these  is  love.  But  love,  Jesus 
says,  is  law. 

But  while  there  is  this  emphasis  on  faith,  there  is  Faith  and 
no  opposition  of  faith  and  works.  When  our  Lord  ^°'^^^- 
declares  that  his  flesh  is  the  food  of  the  Christian  life, 
and  that  faith  is  the  real  partaking  of  it,  he  makes  his 
self-sacrifice  to  be  the  thing  which  imparts  life,  and 
thereby  gives  the  highest  ethical  quality  to  faith.  And 
everything  the  book  says  about  the  eternal  life,  and 
about  the  faith  which  is  the  condition  of  it,  empha- 
sises the  same  high  ethical  note.  But  besides  this 
ethical  quality  of  faith  itself,  there  are  passages  which 
make  obedience,  rather  than  faith,  the  condition  of 
blessing.  In  one  place  obedience  and  faith  are  used 
interchangeably,  obedience  in  the  second  clause  being 
substituted  for  faith  in  the  first  clause.^  In  another 
passage,  eternal  life  is  conditioned,  not  on  belief,  but 

o  1  3 :  36. 


194 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


The  virtues 
emphasised 
in  this 
Gospel. 


on  keeping  his  word.^  In  another  passage,  this  con- 
dition is  not  the  merely  general  one  of  keeping  his 
word,  but  the  hardest  command  of  all,  that  a  man  hate 
his  life.^  And  service  of  Jesus  is  made  identical  with 
following  him  in  his  path  of  self-sacrifice.  In  the 
last  discourse  of  Jesus  with  his  disciples,  love  of  him 
is  emphasised  rather  than  faith,  and  obedience  is  made 
the  test  of  love.^ 

The  virtues  selected  for  mention  and  emphasis  in 
this  Gospel  are  self-sacrifice,*  humility,*  and  love,®  the 
test  of  which  is  again  self-sacrifice,'  We  note  in  this 
enumeration,  first,  its  emphasis  of  self-sacrifice.  It 
makes  this  the  source  of  our  Lord's  spiritual  power, 
and  imitation  of  it  the  condition  of  his  blessing.  Sec- 
ondly, we  notice  the  comparative  meagreness  of  the 
list.  The  great  excellence  of  this  book  is  the  magni- 
fying of  the  inner  life,  a  life  that  has  its  roots  in  be- 
lief of  the  highest  things.  Is  there  any  possible  flaw 
in  this  conception  ?  Yes,  there  is  a  subtle  danger, 
and  it  is  the  danger  from  which  Christianity  has  suf- 
fered from  the  beginning.  There  may  be  so  much 
attention  given  to  the  roots  ot  things  as  to  miss  the 
fruits.  It  is  a  great  thing  to  be  told  that  what  Christ 
bestows  on  us  is  life,  and  that  this  life  has  its  roots  in 
faith  in  Christ.  But  if  the  revelation  does  not  go  on 
to  tell  us  the  meaning  of  this  in  terms  of  human  rela- 
tions and  conduct,  if  life  and  faith  do  not  turn  their 
light  upon  our  lives,  and  show  us  the  things  to  do,  this 
great  thing  is  after  all  defective.  The  meagre  list  of 
virtues  in  this  book  reveals  just  this  defect.  Thirdly, 
the  love  enjoined  here  is  love  of  Christ's  disciples  for 
each  other.     It  is  enjoined,  too,  as  the  new  command- 


18":  51. 

a  12  :  24. 

«  14  :  15  ;  15  :  10,  14. 

*  6 :  61-58 ;  12  :  24  sq. 


6  13  : 1  sq. 

«  13:34,  35;  15  .12  sq. 

f  15 :  13. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING  195 

ment,  the  hitherto  undiscovered  duty  which  our  Lord 
brings  out  of  the  treasure  house  of  his  thought  just  as 
he  is  about  to  leave  them,  and  when  the  flowering  out 
of  his  own  life  into  its  perfect  beauty  enables  him  to 
sum  up  its  lesson  in  a  single  word.  And  this  is  one 
side  of  that  beauty.  The  love  of  God  and  his  Christ 
begets  in  us  love  of  everything  like  them.  It  makes 
us  love  beauty,  goodness,  truth,  and  every  one  in  whom 
these  things  dwell.  But  if  this  is  Jesus'  last  word, 
then  his  last  word  is  not  the  last  word,  and  we  shall 
have  to  seek  for  ultimate  truth  elsewhere.  No,  the 
one  word  which  the  Christ-life  has  to  utter  is  love, 
unlimited  love,  and  its  highest  manifestation  is  not 
love  of  like  things,  but  of  unlike,  the  love  of  the  right- 
eous God  for  sinful  men.  This  Gospel  says,  "  Greater 
love  hath  no  man  than  this,  that  a  man  lay  down  his 
life  for  his  friends."  Jesus  says.  Far  greater  love  is 
mine  —  for  I  lay  down  my  life  for  enemies. 

Can  we  not  see  at  last  where  this  comparative  study  The  suprem 
of  the  New  Testament  books  is  leading  us?  The  ^^rdso?^ 
supremacy  of  those  books  which  contain  the  words  Jesus, 
of  Jesus  himself  is  that  they  incorporate  with  the 
other  elements  of  the  religious  life  the  regulative 
will.  Here,  for  instance,  is  the  Gospel  of  the  contem- 
plative life,  which,  beholding  as  in  a  mirror  the  glory 
of  God,  is  changed  into  the  same  image  from  glory 
to  glory.  The  belief  is  that,  with  this  beholding,  life 
will  take  care  of  itself.  Life  will  never  take  care 
of  itself.  Among  other  things,  after  the  most  perfect 
vision,  it  has  to  ask  what  aspirations,  principles,  af- 
fections, belong  to  life,  and  then  to  cultivate  the  will  to 
embody  these  things.  Here  is  the  common  defect  of 
all  religions.  They  fail  to  marry  religion  to  the  com- 
mon life.  Christ  did  not  stop  short  of  this  final  word, 
but  if  we  leave  him  for  even  the  greatest  of  his  disci- 
ples, we  are  in  danger  of  missing  it. 


196  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

This  Gospel  contains  the  fullest  statement  about 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  be  found  in  the  New  Testament. 
In  these  writings  throughout,  he  figures  in  the  same 
general  way  as  the  immediate  source  of  divine  gifts, 
of  revelations  and  miracles,  especially  of  those  mani- 
festations of  the  divine  in  our  Lord,  and  of  that  grace 
in  the  regenerate  man  by  which  he  resists  the  law  of 
sin,  and  brings  forth  the  fruit  of  love,  joy,  and  peace. 
In  the  book  of  Acts,  Pentecost  is  introductory  to  the 
whole  history,  as  the  descent  of  the  Spirit  at  the  bap- 
tism of  our  Lord  is  in  the  Gospels.  The  special  part 
of  the  Johannean  exposition,  as  we  should  expect,  is 
the  relation  of  the  Spirit  to  Christ,  showing  how  the 
transfer  of  the  centre  of  gravity  from  our  Lord  to  the 
Spirit  is  justified  in  a  writing  in  which  Jesus  has 
been  the  central  figure.  He  takes  the  place  of  Jesus 
as  a  helper  to  his  disciples,  and  has  this  advantage 
over  him,  that  he  is  permanent  whereas  Jesus  is  only 
temporary.^  Owing  to  this  fact,  he  will  guide  them 
into  all  truth,  while  Jesus  at  the  last  has  many  things 
to  say  which  they  cannot  bear.*  It  is  by  Jesus'  own 
act,  and  to  subserve  his  purposes,  that  the  Spirit  is 
sent.'  He  represents  not  himself,  but  the  Son,  as  the 
Son  in  his  turn  represents  the  Father.  He  takes  of 
the  things  of  Christ,  to  reveal  to  us,  and  he  speaks 
only  what  he  hears.*  The  coming  of  the  Spirit  is 
really  Jesus'  own  return  to  his  disciples,  so  complete 
is  this  identification  of  the  two.* 

The  eschatology  of  the  fourth  Gospel  is  very  slight. 
What  there  is  of  it  is  of  the  same  pattern  as  the  New 
Testament  eschatology  generally.  But  it  is  quite 
characteristic  that  this  book,  with  its  tendency  to 
rationalise  everything,  should  have  little  to  say  about 
a  subject  so  prominent  in  other  books  of  the  New 

1  14  :  16.  2  16  :  12,  13.  «  16  :  7. 

*  15  :  26 ;  16  ;  13-15.  »  14 :  16-24 ;  16 :  13-24. 


THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING  197 

Testament.  The  general  teaching  of  the  book  is  that 
the  final  award  is  life.  But  life  is  not  a  thing  for 
which  one  has  to  wait ;  he  who  believes  has  it  already. 
And  on  the  other  hand,  he  who  does  not  believe  is 
condemned  already,  because  he  has  not  believed.  As 
these  two  awards  are  made  in  this  life,  so  the  judg- 
ment on  which  they  are  based  belongs  to  the  same 
time,  the  impressive  present  of  this  book.^  Yet  there 
is  a  last  day,  and  at  that  time  Jesus  consummates 
his  gift  of  eternal  life  by  raising  up  those  who  be- 
lieve.^ He  raises  all  men  alike  also,^  but  there  must 
be  some  special  sense  in  which  he  raises  only  believers. 
While  the  essential  thing  which  he  bestows  is  im- 
mediate, the  future  contains  what  the  present  does 
not.  And  while  the  word  is  not  used,  it  is  evident 
enough  that  this  future  reward  is,  as  usual,  heaven. 
That  is  the  meaning  of  the  "  many  mansions,"  *  and 
of  the  prayer,  that  his  disciples  might  be  with  him.* 

It  is  a  good  lesson  in  the  art  of  discriminating  Paul  and  the 
between  the  different  writers,  to  notice  how  Paul  puts  ^^^^  ^^^ 
the  essential  salvation  into  the  future,  and  calls  the 
present  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  simply  a  pledge,  while 
this  book  dwells  only  slightly  on  the  future,  and 
emphasises  the  immediateness  with  which  whatever  is 
essential  in  salvation  follows  belief.  Only  one  thing 
is  said  about  Jesus'  own  coming,  except  what  has 
already  been  pointed  out  as  identifying  his  coming 
with  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  while  this  one  thing  — 
the  possible  tarrying  of  the  beloved  disciple  until  the 
coming  of  Jesus  —  is  enigmatical,  it  agrees  with  the 
teaching  of  the  New  Testament  generally  as  to  his 
coming  in  the  near  future.® 

The  attraction  of   this  book,  which   leads   many 
theologians  to  put  it  at  the  head  of  the  list  of  New 

1  3  :  16-21.  8  5  :  29.  «  17  :  22-26. 

a  6  :  39,  40.  *  14  : 1  sg.  «  21 :  22,  23. 


198  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

The  "  spirit-  Testament  books,  is  its  exaltation  of  the  person  of  our 
the^fourth^  Lord  on  the  one  hand,  and  its  spirituality  on  the  other. 
Gospel.  But  it  needs  to  be  clearly  understood  just  what  gives 

it  this  character.  Both  its  doctrinal  treatment  of 
Christology  and  its  spiritual  method  have  their  roots 
in  Alexandrianism.  And  Alexandrianism  is  a  very 
specialised  scheme  of  thought,  no  mere  general  spir- 
itual attitude  of  mind,  but  a  very  definite  philosophy. 
For  example,  in  this  philosophy,  the  essential  thought 
underlying  everything  else,  but  especially  its  doctrine 
of  the  Logos,  is  the  transcendence  of  God.  He  not 
only  transcends  the  universe,  but  he  necessarily  trans- 
cends it.  Hence  the  essential  thing,  next  to  this 
transcendence,  is  mediation.  Something  must  bridge 
over  this  gap,  and  the  mediating  agency  must  on  the 
one  hand  be  an  emanation  from  God,  not  a  creation, 
since  the  agent  of  creation  must  be  outside  of  it ;  and 
on  the  other  hand  it  cannot  be  God  himself,  since  the 
old  difficulty  of  transcendence  and  incommunicability 
would  return.  Again,  while  God  is  himself  trans- 
cendent, it  is  equally  necessary  that  the  mediating 
Logos  be  immanent.  The  difficulty  with  which  we 
start  does  not  belong  to  a  purely  transcendent  scheme, 
in  which  God  fashions  his  material  like  a  carpenter, 
or  a  sculptor,  but  the  creative  agency  must  be  life,  and 
life  of  course,  as  a  matter  of  observation,  sits  within,  is 
no  external  artificer.  It  is  just  because  creation  is  an 
immanent  process  that  a  transcendent  God  cannot  be 
the  immediate  agent  of  it.  Immanence  as  the  actual 
process  of  creation  is  one  of  the  dicta  of  this  philoso- 
phy, and  its  first  problem,  therefore,  is  the  reconcilia- 
tion of  this  with  the  transcendence  of  God.  Of  course 
incarnation  involves  immanence,  as  well  as  creation, 
and  therefore  it  is  the  Logos  that  becomes  incarnate 
in  the  Messiah.  For  this  is  where  Alexandrianism 
and  Christianity  come  together.     Christianity  was  not 


THE  JOHANNEAN  TEACHING  199 

in  search  of  a  philosophy  of  creation,  when  it  adopted 
Alexandrianism,  it  was  looking  for  a  philosophy  of 
incarnation.  There  was  no  doubt  that  Jesus  was 
object  to  God ;  his  praying,  and  his  title.  Son  of  God, 
show  this.  Was  there  any  way  in  which  he  could 
become  subject  ?  Alexandrianism  becomes  contribu- 
tory to  Christian  thought  because  its  hypothesis  of  the 
divine  idea,  or  word,  of  creation  met  this  need. 

But  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  fourth  The  Son  and 
Gospel  is  not,  directly  at  any  rate,  the  product  of  the  fourth ^° 
Alexandrianism.     The  Logos  is  himself  the  immanent  Gospel, 
principle  in  God.     He  indwells  in  man,  as  well  as  in 
creation.     The  life  is  the  light  of  men.     But  it  is 
evident  that  the   Spirit  is  in  the  last  analysis  the 
immanent  principle  in  Christianity.     The  reason  for 
Christ's   statement   that    the  coming  of    the   Spirit 
would  more  than  make  up  for  his  own  departure  is 
probably,  from  the  whole  spirit  and  character  of  the 
book,  that  he  compares  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit 
with  his  own  companionship.     He  dwelt   with  the 
disciples;  the  Spirit  dwells  in  them.     There  are  two  ^, 

considerations  which  will  help  us  to  clarify  this  some- 
what diflEicult  matter  of  the  relations  of  the  Son  and 
Spirit  in  a  book  in  which  they  are  drawn  out  as  they 
are  here.  (1.)  The  Logos  is  in  its  very  idea  a  principle 
of  incarnation,  rather  than  immanence.  It  is,  in  its 
original  meaning,  act,  rather  than  part,  in  God.  It  is 
the  divine  thought,  not  the  divine  mind,  that  is  hypos- 
tatised.  And  the  property  of  thought  in  the  process 
of  creation  is  incarnation  strictly,  rather  than  imma- 
nence. The  Logos  is  hypostatised,  and  endowed  with 
creative  life,  but  it  is  thought,  rather  than  mind,  that 
is  so  hypostatised.  The  incarnation  is  thus  not  an 
isolated  fact.  It  is  really  the  process  of  creation, 
which  is  a  continual  incarnation  of  the  divine  thought, 
and  it  is  this  which  culminates  in  the  Messianic  incar- 


200 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


nation.  The  Spirit,  on  the  other  hand,  is  strictly  the 
principle  of  immanence  in  the  Divine  Being.  Human- 
ity is,  in  this  system  an  incarnation,  as  are  trees  and 
animals  on  the  one  hand,  and  our  Lord  on  the  other. 
But,  besides  the  incarnation,  which  is  the  beginning 
of  life  in  both  man  and  the  Son  of  man,  the  represen- 
tation of  this  book  is  that  there  is  a  continual  indwell- 
ing of  God,  and  the  principle  of  this  indwelling  is  the 
Spirit.  It  is  this  distinction  of  incarnation  and 
immanence  which  differentiates  Christian  Alexandri- 
anism,  as  represented  in  this  book,  from  Alexandrian- 
ism  proper,  and  it  is  this  also  which  enables  us  to 
differentiate  the  functions  of  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Spirit.  (2.)  The  second  consideration  is,  that  our  Lord 
himself  becomes  identified  in  the  fourth  Gospel  with 
the  Logos  of  which  he  is  the  incarnation,  as  he  is 
nowhere  else.  He  speaks  the  things  which  he  has 
heard  in  heaven,  he  prays  the  Father  that  he  may 
be  restored  to  the  glory  that  he  had  with  him  before 
the  world  was,  and  he  promises  to  send  the  Spirit. 
Owing  to  this  identification,  the  two  are  identified  in 
the  thought  of  men,  so  that  it  is  the  incarnate  Logos, 
the  Christ,  of  whom  men  inevitably  think  in  this  con- 
nection. He  becomes  the  object  lesson,  the  Deus  in 
petto,  through  whom  the  unknown  God  becomes  known 
to  us.^  It  is  thus  not  the  principle  of  incarnation,  the 
incarnating  Logos,  but  the  incarnate  Logos  himself, 
who  comes  to  us  in  the  Christ,  and  it  is  properly  not 
immanence  but  incarnation  that  we  associate  with  him. 
But  while  this  philosophy  of  the  Divine  Being  is 
thus  speculative  in  its  main  interest,  its  occasions  are 
intensely  practical.  Jesus  dwelt  in  the  thought  of  his 
first  disciples  as  one  with  whom  they  had  associated 
here,  and  who  ruled  things  in  this  world  after  his 


U  :  18. 


THE  JOB  ANNE  AN  TEACHING  201 

departure  into  heaven,  —  on  both  sides  an  objective 
relation.  To  Paul,  who  had  not  this  association,  he 
became  a  mysterious  being,  who  dwelt  in  the  Christian, 
and  the  Christian  in  him,  but  one  in  whom  the  incar- 
nation of  the  divine  figured  only  slightly.  The  human 
life  of  Jesus,  in  which  he  embodied  the  divine,  and 
revealed  to  men  finally  what  God  is,  is  only  now 
beginning  to  occupy  the  place  in  Christian  thought 
which  belongs  to  it,  because  that  thought  has  been  so 
largely  Pauline.  The  Johannean  thought  has  this 
distinction,  that  it  combines  the  two.  Jesus  is  to 
men  life,  light,  food,  drink,  things  which  involve  both 
incarnation  and  immanence,  since  it  is  only  by  his 
embodiment  of  essential  divine  qualities,  that  he  can 
possibly  fulfil  these  supreme  spiritual  offices  for  men, 
and  on  the  other  hand,  a  personal  indwelling  is  the 
divine  method  of  communicating  these  gifts.  But 
the  actual  indweller  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  takes  of 
the  things  of  Christ  and  reveals  them  to  us.  This 
text  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  statement,  "He  who 
has  seen  me  has  seen  the  Father,"  sum  up  for  us  the 
theology  of  the  fourth  Gospel,  giving  us  its  three 
constituent  parts :  transcendence  in  the  Father,  incar- 
nation in  the  Son,  and  immanence  in  the  Holy  Spirit. 

But  the  vague  impression  of  spirituality  left  by  the  The  doctrine 
book  needs  to  be  replaced  by  definite  ideas  still  more  °jq"  ®™^ 
in  regard  to  its  doctrine  of  men  and  redemption.  The 
feeling  that  New  Testament  theology  has  its  culmi- 
nation in  this  book,  is  so  far  from  the  book's  own 
depressing  view  of  human  nature  that  it  shows  better 
than  anything  else  could  the  need  of  clear  and  definite 
views  of  the  progress  of  doctrine  in  the  different  parts 
of  Scripture.  The  world  in  this  book  is  essentially 
evil.  Moreover,  it  is  finally  evil,  it  is  an  impracticable 
world.  And  yet  we  shall  miss  the  true  value  of  this 
book,  if  we  see  in  this  pessimism  anything  peculiar, 


202  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

rather  than  something  in  a  sense  common  to  the 
situation.  The  situation  was  depressing  for  a  lover 
of  his  kind,  and  election,  not  universalism,  was  the 
only  inference  possible.  The  time  given  to  do  all  that 
could  be  done  for  the  world  was  already  past  at  the 
writing  of  this  book.  The  end  had  not  come  yet,  but 
in  the  First  Epistle  the  writer  speaks  of  this  as  "  the 
last  time."^  And  although  Paul  had  skimmed  over 
the  Mediterranean  world,  and  the  intervening  period 
had  added  some  little  to  this  result,  the  coming  of 
the  Lord,  now  expected  at  any  time,  would  find  a 
practically  unconverted  world. 
Pessimism  This  would  not  disturb  so  much  a  person  holding  the 

as  to  the  Jewish  Messianic  view,  but  to  one  who  regarded  the 
Messiah  and  his  work  in  the  spiritual  light  of  this 
Gospel,  the  higher  ideal  only  darkened  the  reality. 
As  at  the  present  time,  when  the  externals  of  the 
Church  tell  so  different  a  story  from  its  effects  on 
society,  its  results  in  the  actual  bettering  of  human 
affairs ;  so  at  that  time,  if  the  work  of  the  Messiah 
was  spiritual  in  the  absolute  sense  of  this  book,  it 
was  evidently  a  work,  not  for  the  world,  but  for  an 
elect  people  whom  the  Messiah  chose  out  of  the  world. 
*  To  make  the  situation  still  worse,  the  essential  feature 
of  this  winding  up  was  a  final  judgment,  in  which 
the  question  was,  not  what  the  Messiah  had  been 
able  to  accomplish  for  men,  but  what  the  attitude 
of  the  world  toward  him  revealed  about  the  world. 
And  the  only  answer  possible  was,  that  it  was  an 
impracticable  world.  If  only  the  time  could  be 
extended,  either  here  or  beyond,  there  would  be  no 
incompatibility  between  the  great  work  that  Christi- 
anity proposed  for  itself,  and  the  time  allotted  to  it. 
But,  as  it  was,  the  situation  itself  is  furnished  by  the 

1  IJn.  2  :  18. 


THE  JOE  ANNE  AN  TEACHING  203 

facts,  and  this  book  attempts  to  find  a  place  for  it  in 
a  reasonable  world.  And  since  the  possibility  of  any- 
thing but  extreme  grace  in  God  disappears  with  the 
advent  of  our  Lord,  the  only  explanation  is  an  irre- 
deemable world.  This  is,  therefore,  the  view  which 
this  book  necessarily  takes  of  humanity.  As  such,  it 
is  hopeless,  and  there  is  hope  for  only  a  few  chosen 
out  from  it.  But  why  chosen  ?  Ultimately  of  course, 
because  of  their  faith  in  Christ.  It  is  only  this  which 
finally  makes  them  sons  of  God.^  But  men  are  already 
classified  before  this.  They  have  aptitude  for  this 
belief,  or,  on  the  other  hand,  a  general  inaptitude  for 
truth,  which  makes  this  belief  impossible  to  them.^  It 
is  men  already  classified  as  good  or  evil,  who  come  to 
the  light  or  refuse  to  be  put  to  the  test  by  it.  It  is 
because  men  are  already  Christ's  sheep  that  they  hear 
his  voice,  while  those  who  are  not  his  sheep  cannot 
hear.  Even  when  the  Spirit  comes,  whose  office  it  is 
to  convince  the  world,  the  world  cannot  receive  him. 
Finally,  bad  men  are  children  of  the  devil,  who  was  a 
liar  from  the  beginning,  and  how  can  they  be  expected 
to  receive  the  truth  ?  It  is  only  necessary  to  finish 
this  picture  by  adding  that  this  is  true  of  mankind 
generally,  to  make  it  a  gloomy  showing  for  humanity. 
But  this,  or  something  like  this,  was  necessary  to 
rationalise  the  situation  to  one  thinking  that  he  stood 
on  the  confines  of  this  world,  immediately  facing  a 
judgment  which  disposed  of  men  finally.  The  writer  justification 
justifies  it  by  the  presence  in  the  world,  first  of  our  ?*fu*P*^^j'' 
Lord  himself,  and  then  of  the  Spirit.  His  idea  is,  evi- 
dently, that  in  them  God  is  giving  the  world  its  last 
chance.  The  Logos  before  his  incarnation  has  been  in 
the  world,  the  light  shining  in  the  darkness,  but  the 

1  1 :  12  ;  3:15  s?.;  12  :  36. 

*  3  :  19-21 ;  6  :  65 ;  7  :  17  ;  8  :  44  ;  10  :  26  s?.  ,•  14  :  17  ;  17  :  9, 
14-16. 


204  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

darkness  apprehended  it  not.  Then  comes  the  incar- 
nation, revealing  to  men,  as  the  law  and  the  immanent 
Logos  could  not,  the  graciousness  and  truth  of  God. 
But  they  did  not  receive  the  incarnate  Word.  Finally 
came  the  Spirit,  whose  office  was  to  convince  the 
world,  but  the  world  could  not  receive  him.  And  now 
the  writer  stands  at  the  end  of  things ;  and  for  the 
world  at  large,  the  end  is  as  the  beginning.  The 
world's  treatment  of  the  creative  Word  is  simply  a 
prophecy  of  its  treatment  of  the  incarnate  Word,  and 
of  the  Spirit,  and  the  result  of  the  whole  process  is 
the  condemnation  of  the  world.  It  could  not  be 
helped,  it  was  self-condemned  from  the  beginning. 
It  is  an  impracticable  world. 

This  result  was  not  imexpected  to  a  Jew.  The  idea 
of  a  divine  election,  not  of  a  world  redemption,  was 
not  new  to  him.  Christianity  had  changed  the  terms 
of  the  election  from  nationality  to  the  spiritual  condi- 
tion for  which  the  elect  nation  stood.  The  elect  were 
no  longer  Jews,  but  believers  out  of  every  nation. 
But  the  idea  of  election  stood  as  the  divine  programme 
of  the  world.  An  elect  few  were  the  final  vindication 
of  the  theocracy. 
The  three  In  affixing  the  values  of  this  New  Testament  book, 

acterist^cs'of  ^^^^e  three  things  are  to  be  especially  remembered : 
the  Gospel.  (1.)  That  it  insists  on  transcendence,  incarnation,  and 
immanence,  as  three  steps  in  the  self-revelation  of 
God ;  or  rather,  on  incarnation  and  immanence  as  two 
steps  in  the  self-revelation  of  the  otherwise  transcen- 
dent and  incommunicable  God.  (2.)  That  it  dwells  on 
the  spiritual  office  of  Christ  and  the  spiritual  meaning 
of  redemption.  (3.)  That  it  is  forced,  by  the  universal 
belief  of  the  first  century  in  the  coming  of  the  final 
judgment  before  the  death  of  all  of  Christ's  coutem- 
pories,  to  despair  of  the  world's  salvation. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE   FIRST  EPISTLE   OF  JOHN 

There  would  have  been  little  necessity  to  treat  this  The  author- 
epistle  separately  from  the  fourth  Gospel,  if  it  were  the^'fourth  ^ 
not  one  of  the  absurdities  of  criticism  to  deny  their  Gospel, 
common  authorship.^  For  while  there  may  be  a  possi- 
bility that  two  writings  so  different  as  Galatians  and 
1  Timothy  should  come  from  the  same  person,  there  is 
no  psychological  possibility  that  two  writings  so  alike 
in  their  unique  doctrine  and  style  as  the  First  Epistle 
and  the  Gospel  of  John  should  come  from  two  persons. 
The  peculiarity  of  the  style  is  as  marked,  for  example, 
as  that  of  George  Meredith.  Nobody  else  in  the  whole 
history  of  literature  ever  wrote  after  this  unexampled 
fashion.  A  style  in  which  there  is  absolutely  no  prog- 
ress, but  a  continual  recurrence  of  theme,  and  com- 
bining this  peculiarity  with  a  very  marked  distinction 
and  elevation  of  thought,  and  beyond  this,  a  peculiar 
way  of  combining  these  and  other  characteristics,  is 
inimitable.     Then,  too,   this  likeness  of  theme  and 

1  On  the  authenticity,  date,  etc. ,  of  First  John,  see  :  Salmond, 
Art.  "Epistles  of  John,"  Hastings'  Diet.;  Weiss,  Introduction 
to  the  N.  T.,  II,  174-197  ;  Holtzraann,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T., 
475-481;  Zahn,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.,  II,  604-676;  Gloag, 
Introduction  to  the  Johannine  Writings,  215-263 ;  Westcott, 
The  Epistles  of  John  ;  Weiss,  Die  Briefe  des  Apostels  Johannes, 
(Meyer  series) ;  Liicke,  Kommentar  iihcr  die  Schriften  des  Eoan- 
gelisten  Johannes ;  Ilaupt,  The  First  Epistle  of  John  ;  Bacon, 
Introduction,  etc.,  in  this  series.  On  the  teaching  of  the  Epistle, 
see  bibliography  under  "  Gospel  of  John." 
205 


206  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

phraseology  is  unmistakable.  The  Word  which  was 
from  the  beginning  with  the  Father,  whose  essential 
quality  is  life,  and  which  was  manifested  unto  us,  is 
the  starting  point  of  both  writings.^  The  manifes- 
tation is  a  coming  in  the  flesh  in  both.''  Christ  is  not 
only  life  but  light.  Only,  in  the  epistle,  his  office  as 
such  is  not  only  to  become  the  light  of  men,  but  to 
show  that  God  is  light.^  The  irreconcilableness  of 
the  world  in  what  is  recognised  as  the  last  time,  and 
the  resulting  doctrine  of  election  instead  of  a  world 
redemption,  is  coincident  with  the  pessimism  of  the 
Gospel.*  The  emphasis  on  love,  and  the  title  given  it 
of  a  new  commandment,  and  on  the  other  hand  the 
restriction  of  this  to  love  of  the  brother  are  the  same 
in  both  writings.*  The  emphasis  of  the  spiritual 
meaning  of  redemption  is  the  same.  The  incompati- 
bility of  belief  in  Christ  with  sin,  and  the  identiflca- 
tion  of  the  love  of  God  with  the  keeping  of  his 
commandments,  is  the  dominant  note  of  this  book. 
The  witness  of  the  Spirit,  the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  and 
the  inward  anointing  with  the  Spirit,  are  the  same  in 
both  writings.*  Throughout,  this  is  no  mere  harmony 
of  teaching,  but  the  constant  recurrence  of  the  same 
phraseology,  —  a  phraseology  which  is  unique  among 
the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

The  subject  of  the  epistle  is  the  revelation  of  God 
in  Christ,  and  the  obligation  which  this  lays  on  the 
Christian.  The  agent  of  the  revelation  is  not  simply 
the  historical  Christ,  but  the  Word  which  was  from 
the  beginning,  and  was  manifested  to  us.^  The  sub- 
stance of  the  revelation  is  that  God  is  light,  unmixed 

1  Jn.  1  : 1-14  ;  IJn.  1  :  1-4. 

«  Jn.  1 :  14  ;  1  Jn.  4  :  2,  3.  «  1  Jn.  1 :  6-7. 

*lJn.  2:15-17;  3:  1,  13  ;  4  : 4,  5 ;  5  : 4,  6,  17. 

«  IJn.  1  :  15-17. 

»  3  :  24  ;  4  :  13  ;  5  :  6  sg.  ;  2  :  20,  27.  M  :  1-4. 


TEE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  207 

light,  and  the  obligation  that  this  lays  on  the  believer 
is,  that  he  walk  in  the  light.*  The  effect  of  this  is  to 
create  a  fellowship  of  children  of  the  light,  this  note 
of  fellowship  being  emphasised  throughout  the  epistle. 
But  this  does  not  mean  the  absence  of  sin :  the  effect 
is  rather  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  the  purification  of 
the  believer,  through  the  death  of  Christ.  He  is  the  Propitiation, 
propitiation  for  our  sins,  a  propitiation  which  is  not 
confined  to  us,  but  extended  over  the  world.  But  the 
writer  evidently  sees  that  the  forgiveness  and  expia- 
tion of  which  he  speaks  may  be  taken  unspiritually, 
as  if  God  could  be  rendered  propitious  to  any  one 
whose  conduct  does  not  please  him,  but  who  pleads 
merely  an  objective  expiation.  No,  the  propitiator 
comes  with  commandments  in  his  hands,  and  it  is  use- 
less for  any  one  to  plead  a  knowledge  of  him  which 
does  not  involve  keeping  these  commands.^ 

But  the  propitiator  brings  not  only  commands,  but  Ethics, 
an  example  for  men  to  follow.^  Moreover,  these  gen- 
eral ideas  of  command  and  example  need  specialising. 
There  is  one  commandment  which  stands  to  the  front, 
the  command  to  love,  not  the  strange  world,  but 
the  brethren.*  There  is  room  for  a  little  doubt  here 
whether  "brother"  is  confined  to  the  members  of  the 
Christian  community,  but  the  use  of  the  collective 
term,  "  the  brethren  "  removes  this  small  doubt.*  Also 
the  use  of  the  reciprocal  pronoun  which  evidently 
includes  only  those  who  exercised  the  faith  of  the  first 
clause.*'  Another  passage  limits  the  terms  still  more 
explicitly,  making  love  of  God,  who  begets  in  us  a  new 
life,  show  itself  in  loving  others  who  are  also  begotten 
of  him."  With  these  is  contrasted  the  world,  which 
they  are  bidden  not  to  love.^ 

11:5,6.  8  2:6.  6  3 .  i4_i6.       75.1. 

2  1:7-2:6.     *  2  :  15-17  ;  2  :  7-11.     6  3:23.  8  2:15-17. 


208 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Believers 
and  the 
world. 


Antichrists. 


The  situation  is  a  peculiar  one,  and  requires  careful 
statement.  The  quality  which  distinguishes  believers 
from  the  world  is  love,  and,  therefore,  the  love  which 
they  have  for  each  other  is  the  love  of  lovers,  and  the 
repugnance  which  they  have  to  the  world  is  repug- 
nance against  haters.  This  is  all  a  legitimate  mani- 
festation of  the  Christian  spirit.  But  there  is  another 
sense  in  which  they  are  to  love  the  world,  and  the 
difl&culty  with  this  epistle,  as  of  the  fourth  Gospel, 
is  that,  when  it  comes  to  emphasise  the  thing  in  man 
which  manifests  the  light,  it  is  not  this  love  of  human- 
ity as  such,  but  the  love  only  of  those  possessing  the 
same  spirit  as  themselves.  Like  the  same  limitation 
in  the  fourth  Gospel,  this  is  a  result  of  the  supposed 
situation  at  the  end  of  the  world,  and  of  regarding 
that  as  the  end  of  the  human  probation.  It  does  not 
result  from  any  limitation  in  the  love  and  grace  of 
God,  but  from  the  incorrigible  evil  of  the  world. 
Love,  certainly  as  an  active  principle,  ceases  with 
this  finality  anywhere.  For  example,  we  are  not  sup- 
posed to  love  the  devil,  and  this  book  and  the  fourth 
Gospel  both  regai-d  the  world,  with  the  slight  excep- 
tion of  the  little  company  of  believers,  as  children  of 
the  devil. 

The  sign  that  it  is  the  last  hour  is  the  existence  of 
antichrists.  These  are  men  who  incarnate  the  spirit 
of  hostility  to  Christ,  while  professing  Christianity. 
The  writer  refers  to  the  prophecy  of  one  whose  coming 
is  the  sign  of  the  very  last  time.  These  antichrists 
are  inferior  incarnations  of  the  same  spirit  whose 
presence  in  the  world  is  a  sign  of  the  immediate  com- 
ing of  the  Antichrist,  of  whom  they  are  the  fore- 
runners. These  are  the  first  heretics,  that  is,  men 
professing  Christianity,  but  denying  what  are  regarded 
as  its  essential  features.  The  point  of  their  heresy  is 
a  denial  that  Jesus  is  the  Messiah.     Of  course,  in  its 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOUN  209 

ordinary  sense,  this  would  make  them  not  heretics, 
but  unbelievers.  It  is  a  constructive  unbelief,  a  belief 
which  is  a  virtual  unbelief.  Moreover,  this  unbelief 
in  the  Son  constitutes  a  virtual  denial  of  the  Father.^ 
It  is  easy  to  identify  this  heresy  by  the  statement,  The  heresy 
that  this  is  he  who  came  not  by  water  only,  but  by  attacked, 
water  and  blood.  Cerinthus  maintained  that  the  man 
Jesus  and  the  heavenly  Christ  were  two  persons,  of 
whom  the  latter  descended  on  the  former  at  his  bap- 
tism, and  left  him  before  his  crucifixion,  since  it  was 
impossible  that  the  Christ  should  suffer.  Over  against 
this,  the  writer  makes  the  statement  that  Christ  was 
manifested  in  the  death,  as  in  any  part  of  the  life 
of  Jesus.  Moreover,  this  error  eliminates  from  the 
account  the  agency  of  the  Spirit  in  the  life  of  Jesus, 
since  it  substitutes  the  Christ  for  the  Spirit  at  the 
baptism.  This  occasions  the  statement  that  there  are 
three  witnesses  to  the  identity  of  the  man  Jesus  with 
the  eternal  Christ,  viz.  the  Spirit,  and  the  Water,  and 
the  Blood.^  These  heretics  were  characterised  not 
only  by  this  specific  error,  but  by  practical  and  prin- 
cipled antinomianism,  which  allowed  men  to  neglect 
works  of  the  law,  and  yet  to  contend  that  they  were 
without  sin,  since  they  believed.  Hence  the  appar- 
ently needless  statement,  that  sin  is  lawlessness,^  and 
the  persistent  return  throughout  the  epistle  to  the 
elemental  truth,  that  for  a  man  to  profess  fellowship 
with  God,  and  yet  walk  in  darkness,  is  to  constitute 
himself  a  liar.  The  same  opposition  to  antinomian- 
ism appears  in  the  seeming  truism,  that  he  who  doeth 
righteousness  is  righteous,  after  the  example  of  Christ's 
righteousness.*  The  statement  which  follows,  that 
whoever  is  begotten  of  God  doeth  not  sin,  is  to  be 
taken  of  the  general  conduct  of  the  children  of  God, 

1  2  :  18-23.  83.4. 

2  3 :  7,  8,  R.  V.  *  3  :  7. 


210  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

not  as  a  statement  of  their  absolute  sinlessness.^  Nei- 
ther the  birth  from  God,  nor  from  the  devil,  which 
are  given  as  the  roots  of  this  righteousness  on  the  one 
hand,  and  of  this  unrighteousness  on  the  other,  is  an 
original  state.  In  the  Johannean  theology,  men  are 
by  birth  children  of  neither  God  nor  the  devil,  but  of 
the  flesh,  a  natural  state  capable  of  transition  into 
either.  In  this  state,  men  become  subject  to  these 
supernatural  influences  of  good  or  evil,  and  pass  into 
one  or  the  other  fixed  state.  But  while  the  flesh  is 
not  a  fixed  state,  it  has  a  bias  toward  evil,  so  that  the 
world  as  such  comes  into  the  fixed  state  of  evil,  and 
only  a  small  company  pass  into  the  fixed  state  of  good 
as  the  children  of  God.  Men  are  represented  as  pass- 
ing out  of  death  into  life,  out  of  sin  into  righteousness, 
but  faith  becomes  impossible  to  him  who  once  is  be- 
gotten of  the  father  of  lies,  and  on'  the  other  hand,  a 
life  of  sin,  not  single  acts  of  sin,  becomes  impossible 
to  the  children  of  God. 
Love  as  the  The  epistle  passes  now  from  righteousness  in  gen- 
""i^rk  ofthe  eral  to  love  in  particular,  as  the  mark  of  the  son  of 
God.  This  love  is  limited  as  we  have  seen,  but  it 
remains  true  that  the  characteristic  of  the  Christian 
community  is  love,  and  of  the  outside  world,  hatred. 
Moreover,  this  love  is  no  fruitless  sentiment,  but  in- 
tensely practical.  Just  as  he  who  is  righteous  doeth 
righteousness,  so  he  who  loves  does  loving  acts.  He 
must  be  ready,  like  Christ,  to  lay  down  his  life  for  the 
brethren,  and  any  one  who  professes  love  to  God  and 
looks  with  indifference  on  his  brother's  needs  is  a  liar.* 
Faith,  But  righteousness  consists  not  only  in  love  but  in 

faith,  a  faith  which  brings  the  believer  into  mystical 
union  with  Christ,  but  which  has  its  practical  test  once 
more  in  keeping  his  commandments.*    This  belief  is 

»  3 : 9 ;  compare  1:8.  2  3: 10-24.  »  3  :  23,  24. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  211 

something  which  has  to  be  discriminated.  There  is  a 
spirit  of  error  as  well  as  of  truth  abroad  in  the  world, 
and  some  of  those  who  profess  to  teach  the  faith  are 
possessed  of  the  one,  some  of  the  other.^  The  test  is  the 
belief  in  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  come  in  the  flesh,  not  in 
the  man  Jesus  who  was  in  the  flesh,  and  upon  whom 
descended  the  eternal  Christ  between  his  baptism  and 
crucifixion.  This  spirit  of  error  is  that  of  the  Anti- 
christ^ who  is  already  in  the  world,  not  in  projiria  per- 
sona, but  constructively,  in  these  inferior  embodiments 
of  the  same  heretical  spirit.  Here,  therefore,  is  another 
limitation  of  the  love  which  is  to  characterise  them. 
They  are  to  discriminate  in  this  love,  not  only  between 
believers  and  unbelievers,  but  between  true  and  false 
believers.^  This  leads  up  to  the  most  radical  statement  Religion  and 
of  the  identity  of  the  religious  and  ethical  principle  to  ^*'^^<^^- 
be  found  in  the  New  Testament.  Love  is  the  ethical 
principle  of  Christianity,  and  commonly  the  statement 
of  its  relation  to  the  religious  principle,  the  dwelling 
of  the  soul  in  God,  is  that  the  possession  of  the  reli- 
gious principle  necessarily  involves  the  possession  of 
the  ethical  principle.  But  here  we  have  the  reverse 
statement,  that  to  dwell  in  love  is  to  dwell  in  God.  A 
man  may  seem  to  himself  and  to  others  a  disbeliever, 
but  if  he  has  love  for  the  law  of  his  conduct,  he  is 
really  no  disbeliever,  but  a  true  dweller  in  God.^ 

The  only  important  remaining  teaching  is  in  regard  The  sin  unto 
to  the  sin  unto  death,  for  which  men  are  not  bidden  to  ^^^'''^• 
pray.  Really,  this  is  more  puzzling  than  important. 
The  writer  is  talking  of  the  sins  to  which  believers 
are  subject,  and  distinguishes  betAveen  those  which  are 
mortal  and  those  which  are  venial.  Evidently,  the 
sin  that  is  mortal  is  the  sin  by  which  believers  actually 
pass  out  of  spiritual  life  into  spiritual  death,  a  lapse 

1  4  : 1-6.  a  4  :  G,  7.  »  4  :  IG. 


212  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

back  into  the  world.  But  inasmuch  as  life  comes 
through  the  faith  or  knowledge  of  God  in  Christ,  the 
sin  unto  death  is  conscious  or  constructive  loss  of  that 
faith. 

This  insistence  on  a  correct  belief  in  regard  to  the 
superhuman  side  of  Jesus'  nature  and  origin  places 
this  book  among  those  in  the  New  Testament  in  which 
pistis  has  been  developed  into  gnosis,  belief  into 
knowledge.  And  especially  the  identification  of  sav- 
ing faith  with  this  gnosis,  making  error  in  regard  to 
this  matter  a  constructive  unbelief,  a  lapse  from  faith, 
and  the  men  who  teach  it  an  incarnation  of  the  spirit 
of  hostility  to  Christ,  forerunners  of  the  Antichrist, 
indicates  an  advanced  stage  in  the  development  of  the 
Gnostic  f  aith.^ 

1  CEniNTHIANISM    AND   THE  DaTB  OF    THE  FoURTH  GOSPEL. — 

The  date  of  the  Johannean  writings,  which  has  bee^^  a  matter  of 
the  convergence  of  a  number  of  more  or  less  convincing  signs, 
all  of  which  leave  the  matter  more  or  less  in  doubt,  owing  to 
the  absence  of  any  one  sure  sign,  is  fixed  by  the  allusion  to  Ce- 
rinthianism  in  the  First  Epistle.  As  long  as  the  heresy  spoken  of 
was  treated  in  a  vague  way  as  a  sort  of  Gnosticism,  or  with 
slightly  more  definiteness  as  Docetism,  no  special  value  was 
attached  to  it  as  a  chronological  datum  (4.1-3;  5:6-8).  But 
Cerinthianism  is  definite  in  both  its  marks  and  date,  being 
associated  with  the  one  person  whose  name  it  bears.  His 
period  marks  the  very  close  of  the  century,  from  97  a.d.,  on. 
This  would  make  the  time  of  the  opposing  Johannean  writings 
probably  the  beginning  of  the  second  century.  K  John  himself 
is  their  author,  therefore,  it  would  constitute  a  remarkable 
literary  phenomenon,  standing  quite  by  itself  in  the  history  of 
letters,  being  no  more  nor  less  than  the  production  of  writings 
which  are  in  the  front  rank  of  New  Testament  books  by  a  cen- 
tenarian. The  association  of  them  with  John  is  not  unwar- 
ranted probably,  owing  to  the  presence  in  them  of  his  influence 
and  teaching.  But  probably  their  Alexandrianism  is  due,  not 
to  John,  but  to  the  writer  himself,  who  put  the  apostle's  actual 
teaching  into  this  speculative  form. 


SUMMARY 

The  books  of  the  New  Testament  are  divided  into 
the  following  groups :  — 

1.  The  Synoptic  Gospels,  giving  the  teaching  of 
Jesus. 

2.  The  early  teaching  of  the  Twelve,  given  in  the 
first  twelve  chapters  of  the  took  of  Acts. 

3.  The  Pauline  Epistles,  including  Galatians,  1  and 
2  Corinthians,  Eomans,  Philippians,  Philemon,  and 
possibly  1  and  2  Thessalonians. 

4.  The  later  teaching  of  the  Twelve,  including 
the  Synoptical  Gospels,  James,  1  Peter,  and  the 
Apocalypse. 

5.  The  Alexandrian  Group,  including  (1)  Ephesians, 
Colossians,  1  and  2  Timothy,  Titus,  Hebrews,  2  Peter, 
Jude,  and  (2)  the  Johannean  Writings. 

The  Synoptic  Gospels  belong  to  the  later  teaching  Justification 
of  the  apostles,  not  to  the  earlier  teaching.     This  is  ciassifica- 
proved  by  the  liberal  attitude  of  these  Gospels  toward  ^^°^' 
the  ceremonial  parts  of  the  Mosaic  code,  a  liberalism 
from  which  the  apostles  reacted  in  their  early  teach- 
ing.    Ephesians  and  Colossians  are  not  included  in 
the    Pauline  writings   because    they  are    distinctly 
Alexandrian  in  their  teaching,  whereas  Paul  was  not 
an  Alexandrian,  but  a  Pharisee  in  his  theological 
thought.     (See   1  Cor.  1  :  17-3 :  23.)     The  wisdom 
against  which  the  apostle  contends  in  this  passage, 
means   an  attempt  to  interpret  Christianity  in  the 
terms  of  a  secular  philosophy  j  and  the  only  secular 

213 


'^  214  NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 

philosophy  applied  to  this  use  was  Alexandrianism, 
See  also  Gal.  1 :  14,  where  Paul  describes  himself  as  a 
zealous  Pharisee. 

The  Pastoral  Epistles  are  classed  as  un-Pauline, 
partly  because  of  their  Alexandrianism,  but  especially 
because  of  their  appeal  to  authority.  The  authority 
appealed  to  is  that  of  the  Church,  which  implies  a 
united  Church,  teaching  one  doctrine,  whereas  the 
Jewish  and  Gentile  churches  were  divided  in  their 
doctrinal  teaching. 

2  Peter  and  Jude  belong,  by  the  character  of  their 
teaching,  to  the  Alexandrian  group  of  writings,  rather 
than  the  apostolic  teaching.  Their  minute  resem- 
blance shows  their  interdependence,  with  the  proba- 
bility that  Jude  is  the  earlier  of  the  two.  1  and  2 
Peter  are  separated  from  each  other  by  a  verbal  dis- 
sonance which  makes  it  impossible  to  refer  them  to 
the  same  author. 

The  Johannean  writings  are  all  so  persistently 
connected  with  the  name  of  the  Apostle  John  as  to 
make  it  improbable  that  the  connection  means  nothing. 
Probably  they  were  written  by  some  disciple  of  John, 
who  put  his  teaching,  in  regard  to  the  Master,  in  its 
present  Alexandrian  form.  The  reference  to  Coriuthi- 
anism  in  the  first  epistle  makes  the  probable  date  of 
this  and  the  fourth  Gospel  in  the  beginning  of  the 
second  century  (1  John  5:6-8). 
The  teach-  The  teaching  of  Jesus  has  for  its  subject  the  king- 
ing of  Jesus,  dom  of  God.  This  kingdom,  which  to  the  Jews 
meant  their  national  independence  and  greatness  as 
the  favoured  people  of  God,  Jesus  spiritualised.  To 
him  it  meant  the  spiritual  rule  of  God  in  the  hearts  of 
all  men.  This  kingdom  he  came  to  establish,  without 
force,  by  the  persuasions  of  truth. 

The  law  of  the  kingdom,  which  in  the  Jewish  view 
was  a  mixture  of  ethical  principles  and  ceremonial 


SUMMARY 


215 


rules,  he  spiritualised,  eliminating  all  the  ceremonial- 
ism. The  ethical  principles  he  reduced  to  two:  the 
supreme  love  of  God  and  the  equal  love  of  your  neigh- 
bour and  yourself.  This  law  he  enforced  by  showing 
love  to  be  supreme  in  God,  so  that  he  makes  it  his 
supreme  requirement  of  men. 

This  spiritual  teaching  of  Jesus  the  early  apostles  The  teach- 
materialised,   reverting  to  the  Jewish  view  of  the  "afiy^  ***° 
kingdom.     They  set  up  again  the  ceremonialism  of  disciples, 
the  Mosaic  code;  they  substituted  force  for  persua- 
sion, as  the  means  of  establishing  the  kingdom ;  and 
they  narrowed  the  scope  of  the  kingdom,  making  it 
Jewish,  instead  of  universal. 

Paul  revolutionised  this  materialistic  teaching  of  Theteach- 
the  Twelve,  revoking  again  the  ceremonialism  taught  ^"^  ^^  ^*"*' 
by  them.  In  fact,  he  insisted  that  salvation  was 
impossible  under  the  law  which  had  the  effect  of 
making  all  men  alike,  Jews  and  Gentiles,  sinners. 
He  therefore  substituted  for  the  righteousness  of  the 
law,  the  righteousness  of  faith.  This  faith,  under 
the  old  dispensation,  he  made  to  be  faith  in  God,  and 
under  the  new  dispensation  the  faith  in  Christ,  espe- 
cially in  the  sacrificial  death  of  Jesus,  which  is  the 
distinctive  element  in  the  Pauline  teaching.  He  made 
the  Gospel  universal,  and  himself  set  out  to  convert 
the  Gentile  world. 

The  universal  sin  of  men  he  rationalised,  tracing  it 
back  to  the  sin  of  Adam,  whose  individual  sin  became 
a  race  sin.  He  also  located  sin  in  the  body  or  flesh 
of  man,  making  it  necessary  to  rehabilitate  not  only 
man's  spirit,  but  his  bodily  part  as  well.  The  restora- 
tion of  man's  spirit  he  accomplished  through  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  the  restoration  of  the  body  he  accomplishes 
through  the  resurrection,  which  is  not  merely  a  rais- 
ing of  the  body,  but  its  change  and  glorification. 

The  element  in  this  Pauline  teaching  which  did 


216 


NEW  TESTAMENT  THEOLOGY 


Paulinism 
and  the 
Synoptics. 


James 
and  the 
Apocalypse. 


away  with  the  ceremonialism  of  the  law  the  early- 
apostles  adopted  as  their  own;  but  the  rejection  of 
the  law  as  a  whole  they  steadily  opposed.  The  Sy- 
noptical Gospels,  which  came  from  the  circle  of  the 
Twelve,  had  their  origin  in  this  controversy,  and  were 
intended  to  show  by  the  authority  of  Jesus  that  obedi- 
ence to  the  law  of  God  was  not  only  a  condition  of  his 
favour  but,  in  the  last  analysis,  the  only  condition  of 
that  favour.  At  the  same  time  it  was  shown,  also  on 
the  authority  of  Jesus,  that  the  law  was  liberalised 
and  spiritualised,  becoming  a  law  of  freedom. 

The  Epistle  of  James,  which  belongs  to  the  same 
group  of  writings,  though  its  authorship  is  uncertain, 
takes  up  the  debate  against  Paul's  doctrine  of  justifi- 
cation by  faith  without  the  works  of  the  law,  and 
shows  that  justification  is  by  faith  and  works,  with 
the  emphasis  on  works.  The  Apocalypse,  which  is 
also  of  an  uncertain  authorship,  engages  in  the  same 
controversy,  and  denounces,  without  any  delicacy  of 
speech,  Paul's  doctrine  of  liberty  in  regard  to  eating 
meat  offered  in  sacrifice  to  idols. 

Alexandrianism,  which  is  a  philosophy  of  the  uni- 
verse, teaches  that  creation  is  impossible  to  God,  since 
he  is  spirit  and  the  universe  is  material,  and  in  the 
Greek  philosophy  spirit  and  matter  cannot  mix.  Crea- 
tion, therefore,  is  through  the  agency  of  divine  emana- 
tions, which  are  God's  creative  ideas  become  personal, 
and  possessed  of  creative  power.  A  lower  order  of 
these  emanations  is  the  angels  who  represent  the 
ideas  of  individual  things.  In  the  early  period  of 
Christian  Alexandrianism,  this  lower  order  of  divine 
emanations  was  given  a  quasi-superiority  to  Christ, 
as  he  is  the  agent  of  redemption,  while  they  are  the 
agents  of  the  higher  work  of  creation.  But  in  the 
later  writings  of  this  group,  Jesus  himself  becomes 
the   incarnation  of  the  Logos,  the  supreme  divine 


SUMMARY  217 

emanation,  who  represents,  not  the  ideas  of  individual 
things,  but  of  the  universe  itself. 

It  thus  appears  that  the  purely  spiritual  teaching  of  Conclusion. 
Jesus  becomes  in  the  hands  of  the  Twelve  a  material- 
ised Jewish  Messianism,  in  the  hands  of  Paul,  a  return 
in  part  to  the  spiritualism  and  catholicity  of  our  Lord's 
teaching,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  a  mixture  of  theolo- 
gising  and  priestism  with  that  spiritual  element;  that 
in  the  debate  between  Paul  and  the  Twelve,  the  early 
Apostles  went  back  to  the  teaching  of  our  Lord,  writ- 
ing the  Synoptic  Gospels  to  show  his  view  in  regard 
to  the  matters  under  controversy ;  and,  finally,  that  in 
Alexandrianism  the  Gospel  underwent  its  last  trans- 
formation into  a  system  of  speculative  philosophy. 

Almost  everywhere  in  the  writings  of  the  New 
Testament,  however,  no  matter  what  their  doctrinal 
peculiarities  may  be,  there  is  present  a  dominant  ethi- 
cal and  spiritual  note,  derived  from  the  teaching  and 
influence  of  Jesus,  which  was  not  able  to  keep  out 
elements  of  change  and  deterioration,  but  was  able  to 
keep  everything  in  subjection  to  itself. 


INDEX 


Acts,  early  chapters,  51-57. 

Alexandrian  Period,  N.  T.,  132- 
213. 

AWandrianism.  Colcssians  and 
Epliesians,  136-138;  Hebrews, 
1G2,  163;  fourth  Gospel,  198- 
201. 

Antichrists,  1  John ,  208-213. 

Antinomiauism,  1  John,  209-210; 
2  Peter,  157. 

Apocalypse,  125-131;  anti-Paul- 
inism  of,  125;  autlwr,  126; 
contents,  127,  128;  Jewish 
Messianism  of,  128,  129;  Uni- 
versalisni  of,  129;  atonement, 
ethical  in,  130;  composite 
authorship,  131. 

Atonement,  Apocalypse,  130; 
Hebrews,  171,  172. 

Beelzebub,  35. 

Bible,  differences  between  books, 

1. 
Biblical  Theology,  definition,  1. 

Christology,  of  Synoptics,  34-39 : 
early  teaching  of  Twelve,  52, 
53;  Paul,  91-100;  Philippiaus, 
98-100;  James,  115-116;  1 
Peter,  122-123;  Colossians,  13(>- 
138;  Ephesians,  139;  Pastoral 
Epistles,  149, 150;  2  Peter,  1158- 
159;  Hebrews,  163-164,  166; 
fourth  Gospel,  183-187. 

Church  idea,  Ephesians,  141. 


Colossians,  anthorship,  134 ;  her- 
esy controverted,  135,  136;  re- 
ply, 13f)-138;  Alexandrianism 
of  both,  136-138. 

Deutero-Isaiah,  4. 

Ecclesiasticism,  in  Pastoral  Epis- 
tles, 145, 150,  152. 

Ephesians.  Christology,  139 ; 
unity  in  Christ,  139;  ChrLst, 
head  of  creation,  universal 
reconciler,  139-141 ;  church 
idea,  141. 

Eschatology.  Synoptics,  44-48 ; 
early  teaching  of  Twelve,  56; 
Paul,  84-90;  2  Peter,  157,  158. 

Eucharist,  original  idea,  33. 

Faith,  Synoptics,  16, 17;  James, 
110-112 ;  2  Peter,  154-156 ;  He- 
brews, 170;  fourth  Gospel, 
191-194 ;  1  John,  210,  211 ;  faith 
and  works,  Paul,  58-65 ;  James, 
110-112. 

Fourth  Gospel,  193,  194;  date, 
212;  contrast  with  Synoptics, 
174-176 ;  parallels  between 
fourth  Gospel  and  Synoptics, 
177-181;  subject,  182;  Logos 
doctrine,  18.'5-185;  Christology, 
184-187;  work  of  Jesus,  187- 
191;  faith,  191-193;  faith  and 
works,  193,  194;  Holy  Spirit, 
196;  Alexandrianism,  198-201; 
pessimism,  201-207. 


219 


220 


INDEX 


Gnosis.    Pastoral  Epistles,  146- 

148 ;  2  Peter,  154-156. 
God,  doctrine  of,  in  Synoptics, 

13-23;  Jewish  contribution  to 

doctrine,  14;  Fatherhood,  19; 

judgments,  22 ;  grace,  23;  law 

of  love,  20. 
Gospels,  doctrine  of  Synoptic,  1- 

50. 

Hebrews,  epistle  to,  160-173 ;  au- 
thorship, 160;  allegorism,  160- 
162;  object  of  epistle,  162; 
Alezandrianism,  162,  163; 
Christ's  superiority  to  angels, 
162-164;  to  Moses,  105;  to  Le- 
vitical  priestliood,  166-168 ;  sec- 
ond tabernacle  vs.  first,  168- 
170;  definition  of  faith,  170; 
the  incarnation,  171 ;  the  atone- 
ment, 171-172. 

Heresy,  Colossians,  135, 136 ;  Pas- 
toral Epistles,  146-148 ;  2  Peter, 
157,  158 ;  1  John,  209,  210. 

Holy  Spirit,  Paul,  80-83 ;  fourth 
Gospel,  196. 

Hope,  1  Peter,  118-121. 

Incarnation,  Hebrews,  171. 

James,  epistle,  authorship,  101- 
103;  teaching,  109-117 ;  relation 
to  Jesus'  teaching,  109, 110 ;  re- 
lation to  Paul's  teaching,  110- 
112 ;  law  of  liberty,  114,  115 ; 
Christology,  115,  116. 

Jesus'  teaching,  1-50 ;  doctrine  of 
God,  1-23;  Christology,  34-39; 
Messianic  kingship,  37,  38; 
Messianic  titles,  36 ;  conception 
of  man,  40-43;  eschatology, 
44-48. 

Jesus,  works  of,  in  fourth  Gos- 
pel, 187-191;  effect  of  death, 
early  teaching  of  Twelve,  53 ; 
Paul,  74-79;  1  Peter,  121. 

Jewish  literature,  uncanonical,  2. 


Johannean  writings,  174-213; 
fourth  Gospel,  contrast  with 
Synoptics,  174-176 ;  parallels 
between  John  and  Synoptics, 
177-181.  See  Fourth  Gospel,  etc. 

John,  first  epistle,  authorship, 
205-206;  subject,  206;  ethical 
emphasis,  207;  Antichrists, 
208-213:  Cerinthianism,  209; 
Antinomianism,  209-210;  sin 
unto  death,  211,  212. 

Kingdom  of  God,  Jesus'  teaching, 
10-12,  24-33;  idea  and  form, 
24;  condition  of  membership, 
24;  obedience  unforced,  25; 
methods  of,  parables,  25 ;  law 
of,  27-33;  spiritual  interpreta- 
tion of  law,  27-32. 

Law  of  liberty,  114, 115;  of  love, 

21. 
Levitical   priesthood,   Hebrews, 

166-168. 
Logia  of  Matthew,  7,  8. 

Messianic  idea.  4. 

Messianism,  Jewish,  early  teach- 
ing of  Twelve,  54,  55 ;  Apoca- 
lypse, 128-131 

Miracles  of  Jesus,  significance, 
14-16;  relation  of  faith  to, 
16. 

New  Testament  books,  groups  of, 
4,5. 

Pastoral  Epistles,  authorship, 
144,  145;  appeal  to  authority, 
145;  ecclesiasticisra,  145,  151, 
152;  heresy  attacked,  146-148; 
teaching  ethical,  148,  149; 
Christology,  149,  150;  doctrine 
of  salvation,  150;  doctrinal 
simplicity,  150,  151. 

Paul,  writings,  5;  teaching  of, 
58-60 ;  sin  and  law,  58-65 ;  law 


INDEX 


221 


abolished,  5&-62;  substitution 
of  faith,  62;  universal  sin, 
rationale,  63,  64;  sin  super- 
ficial, 65;  righteousness  of 
faith,  66-79;  election,  71,  72; 
Jesus'  death,  doctrine,  74-79; 
Holy  Spirit,  80-83;  salvation, 
completion  of,  84-90;  Chris- 
tology,  91-100;  in  Philippians, 
98-100. 

Peter,  authorship  of  first  epistle, 
103-107 ;  address  and  date,  118 ; 
teaching,  118-124;  general  sub- 
ject, 118-121;  contrast  with 
Pavflinism,  120,  121 ;  redemp- 
tion, 121,  122;  Christology, 
122,  123. 

Peter,  second  epistle,  153-159; 
authorship,  153,  154 ;  gnosis, 
154-156 ;  a  pseudonymous 
prophecy,  156 ;  heresies  at- 
tacked, 157,  158;  Christology, 
158, 159. 

Righteousness  of  faith,  Paul,  66- 

79. 


Salvation,  Pastoral  Epistles,  150. 

Servant  of  Jehovah  (Yahweh),  4. 

Sin,  doctrine  of,  in  Synoptics,  40- 
43. 

Sin  and  law,  Paul,  58-65. 

Sin  unto  death,  1  John,  211,  212. 

Son  of  God,  36. 

Son  of  man,  36. 

Synoptics,  origin,  7-11;  anti- 
Judaism,  7;  belong  to  later 
apostolic  writings,  9. 

Twelve,  early  teaching,  5, 51,  57 ; 
later  teaching,  5, 101-131 ;  early 
teaching,  sources,  51 ;  histo- 
ricity, 51,  52;  Jesus,  ofiice  and 
work,  on  earth,  in  heaven,  on 
his  return,  52,  53;  his  death, 
53 ;  his  person,  54 ;  Jewish  Mes- 
sianism,  54,  55;  emphasis  of 
second  coming,  56;  Jewish 
legalism,  56-57. 

Wealth,  Jesus'  hostility  to,  28, 
29. 


GENESIS  OF  THE  SOCIAL  CONSCIENCE 

By  HBNRY  SYLVESTER   NASH 

Professor  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

THE  RELATION   BETWEEN  THE   ESTABLISHMENT  OF  CHRISTIAN- 
ITY  IN    EUROPE  AND  THE  SOCIAL   QUESTION 

Crown  8vo.       Cloth.        $1.50 


New  Unity  : 

"  The  book  is  a  novelty.  It  is  an  interesting  experiment.  It  is  worth 
writing  and  therefore  worth  the  reading.  Professor  Nash  undertakes  to 
demonstrate  the  moral  thread  in  history.  He  follows  this  moral  line  alone. 
It  is  in  order  to  show  the  rise  and  growth  of  the  social  conscience. 
The  style  of  the  book  is  crisp ;  but  it  is  never  dull." 

The  Critic  : 

"  The  pages  glitter  with  bright  sayings ;  there  are  many  attractive 
passages.  The  book  is  more  than  a  tacit  protest  against  the  materialistic 
explanation  of  history." 


ETHICS    AND    REVELATION 

By  HENRY  SYLVESTER  NASH 
i2mo.        Cloth.        $1.50 


Nashville  Banner : 

"The  author  goes  into  the  work  with  an  earnestness,  breadth,  and 
intelligence  that  gives  great  interest  to  what  he  has  to  say." 

Charleston  News  and  Courier  : 

"The  value  and  significance  of  Professor  Nash's  lectures  lie  chiefly 
in  the  advanced  ground  which  he  takes  up  with  regard  to  the  authority  of 
the  Bible  and  the  Church  in  the  matter  of  religious  and  social  ethics.  He 
begins  by  the  assertion  that  the  Bible  marks  out  the  road  along  which 
conscience  must  travel  if  it  would  treat  our  life  on  earth  with  abiding 
seriousness.  But  he  is  careful  to  show  that  the  Bible  should  be  seen  and 
regarded  in  the  light  of  history." 


THE    MACMILLAN    COMPANY 

66  FIFTH  AVENUE,   NEW  YORK 


New  Testament   Handbooks 


EDITED   BY 

SHAILER  MATHEWS 

Professor  of  New  Testament  History  and  Interpretation, 
University  of  Chicago 

Arrangements  are  made  for  the  following  volumes,  and  the  publishers 
will,  on  request,  send  notice  of  the  issue  of  each  volume  as  it  appears  and 
each  descriptive  circular  sent  out  later;  such  requests  for  information 
should  state  whether  address  is  permanent  or  not :  — 

The  History  of  the  Textual  Criticism  of  the 

New  Testament 

Prof.  Marvin  R.  Vincent,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Exegesis, 
Union  Theological  Seminary.  \^Now  reaify. 

Professor  Vincent's  contributions  to  the  study  of  the  New  Testament  rank  him 
among  the  first  American  exegetes.  His  most  recent  publication  is  "  A  Critical 
and  Exegetical  Commentary  on  the  Epistles  to  the  Philippians  and  to  Philemon  " 
(Internatinnal  Critical  Commentary),  which  was  preceded  by  a  "  Students' 
New  Testament  Handbook,"  "  Word  Studies  in  the  New  Testament,"  and 
others. 

The  History  of  the  Higher  Criticism  of  the 

New  Testament 

Prof.  Henry  S.  Nash,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation, 
Cambridge  Divinity  School. 

Of  Professor  Nash's  "Genesis  of  the  Social  Conscience,"  The  Outlook  safd:  "  The 
results  of  Professor  Nash's  ripe  thought  are  presented  in  a  luminous,  compact, 
and  often  epigrammatic  style.  The  treatment  is  at  once  masterful  and  helpful, 
and  the  book  ought  to  be  a  quickening  influence  of  the  highest  kind;  it  surely 
will  establish  the  fame  of  its  author  as  a  profound  thinker,  one  from  whom  we 
have  a  right  to  expect  future  inspiration  of  a  kindred  sort." 

Introduction  to  the  Boolcs  of  the  New  Testament 

Prof.  B.  Wisner  Bacon,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation, 
Yale  University. 

Professor  Bacon's  works  in  the  field  of  Old  Testament  criticism  include  "  The 
Triple  Tradition  of  Exodus,"  and  "  The  Genesis  of  Genesis,"  a  study  of  the 
documentary  sources  of  the  books  of  Moses.  In  the  field  of  New  Testament 
study  he  has  published  a  number  of  brilliant  papers,  the  most  recent  of  which  is 
"  The  Autobiography  of  Jesus,"  in  the  American  journal  of  Theology. 

The  History  of  New  Testament  Times  in  Palestine 

'Prof.  Shailer  Mathews,  Professor  of  New  Testament  History  and 
Interpretation,  The  University  of  Chicago.  \^Noav  ready. 

The  Congregationalist  says  of  Prof.  Shailer  Mathews's  recent  work,  "The  Social 
Teaching  of  Jesus"  :  "  Re-reading  deepens  the  impression  that  the  author  is 
scholarly,  devout,  awake  to  all  modern  thought,  and  yet  conservative  and  pre- 
eminently sane.  If,  after  reading  the  chapters  dealing  with  Jesus'  attitude 
toward  man,  society,  the  family,  the  state,  and  wealth,  the  reader  will  not  agree 
with  us  in  this  opinion,  we  greatly  err  as  prophets." 


The  Life  of  Paul 

Prof.  Rush  Riiees,  President  of  the  University  of  Rochester. 

Professor  Rhees  is  well  known  from  his  series  of  "  Inductive  Lessons  "  contributed 
to  the  Sunday  School  Times.  His  "  Outline  of  the  Life  of  Paul,"  privately 
printed,  has  had  a  flattering  reception  from  New  Testament  scholars. 

The  History  of  the  Apostolic  Age 

Dr.  C.  W.  VoTAW,  Instructor   in    New  Testament    Literature,  The 
University  of  Chicago. 

Of  Dr.  Votaw's  "  Inductive  Study  of  the  Founding  of  the  Christian  Church,"  Modern 
Ckurck,  Edinburgh,  says:  "No  fuller  analysis  of  the  later  books  of  the  New 
Testament  could  be  desired,  and  no  better  programme  could  be  offered  for  their 
study,  than  that  afforded  in  the  scheme  of  fifty  lessons  on  the  Founding  of  the 
Christian  Church,  by  Clyde  W.  Votaw.  It  is  well  adapted  alike  for  practical 
and  more  scholarly  students  of  the  Bible." 

The  Teaching  of  Jesus 

Prof.  George   B.  Stevens,  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology,  Yale 
University. 

Professor  Stevens's  volumes  upon  "  The  Johannine  Theology,"  "  The  Pauline  The- 
ology," as  well  as  his  recent  volume  on  "  The  Theology  of  the  New  Testament,"  . 
have  made  him   probably   the   most  prominent  writer  on  biblical  theology  in 
America.     His  new  volume  will  be  among  the  most  important  of  his  works. 

The  Biblical  Theology  of  the  New  Testament 

Prof.  E.  P.  Gould,  Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation,  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Divinity  School,  Philadelphia. 

Professor  Gould's  Commentaries  on  the  Gospel  of  Mark  (in  the  International  Criti- 
cal Commentary)  and  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  (in  the  American  Com- 
mentary) are  critical  and  exeeetical  attempts  to  supply  those  elements  which 
are  lacking  in  existing  works  of  the  same  general  aim  and  scope.  \In  prepara- 
tion.'] 

The  Teaching  of  Jesus  and  Modern  Social  Problems 

Prof.  Francis  G.  Peabody,  Professor   of  Christian   Ethics,  Harvard 
University. 

Professor  Peabody's  public  lectures,  as  well  as  his  addresses  to  the  students  of 
Harvard  University,  touch  a  wide  range  of  modem  problems.  The  many  read- 
ers of  his  "Mornings  in  the  College  Chapel "  and  his  published  studies  upon 
social  and  religious  topics,  will  welcome  this  new  work. 

The  History  of  Christian  Literature  until  Eusebius 

Prof.  J.  W.  PI.ATNER,  Professor   of    Early  Church  History,  Harvard 
University. 

Professor  Platner's  work  will  not  only  treat  the  writings  of  the  early  Christian 
writers,  but  will  also  treat  of  the  history  of  the  New  Testament  Canon. 

OTHERS    TO    FOLLOW 


THE   MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 


The  Social  Teachings  of  Jesus 

An  Essay  in  Christian  Sociology 


BY 


SHAILER    MATHEWS,  A.M. 

Professor  of  New  Testament  History  and  Interpretation  in 
the  University  of  Chicago 


i2nio.    Cloth.    $1.50 

Outlook  : 

"  Such  a  study  is  sure  to  be  useful,  and  if  the  reader  sometimes  feels 
that  the  Jesus  here  presented  has  the  spirit  of  which  the  world  for  the 
most  part  approves  rather  than  that  which  brings  its  persecution,  he 
will  with  renewed  interest  turn  to  the  words  of  Jesus  as  narrated  in  the 
four  Gospels." 

Christian  Index  : 

"  We  commend  Professor  Mathews's  book  to  all  interested  in  matters 
sociological,  exegetical,  and  to  all  Christians  who  desire  to  know  the 
will  of  their  Lord  and  Master." 

Congregationalist  : 

"  The  author  is  scholarly,  devout,  awake  to  all  modern  thought,  and 
yet  conservative  and  preeminently  sane." 

The  Evangel : 

♦'  Professor  Mathews  gives  the  thoughtful  reader  a  veritable  feast  in 
this  essay  in  Christian  Sociology.  It  is  well  thought  out  and  carefully 
written.  ...  It  is  surely  an  able  book,  worthy  of  careful  perusal,  and 
gives  promise  of  exerting  a  permanent  influence  upon  Christian  thought 
and  life." 


THE    MACMILLAN   COMPANY 

66  FIFTH  AVENUE,  NEW  YORK 


3  2-,f  2"   ^2  • 


<''^:': '         M.  . 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  9482 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

II  mill  II  Pill  III  I  III!  iji  mill 


A    001 


024  254     3 


><:il<J| 


ii  1,11  i<  ih  ,  ,    i'  >  I  ,    ii     I'l  <ii  III  iij  I 

1"'   I'll     I  .!  1.  >.,,  II     M        1  '  '  1   (i,  '  1  ,   !, 
■  'll  l||V'i|il.il''.il  l-i"  Mil    I  I' 


llll 


,  ;;iiit;,.i|,  d  i-;';"!'' 

llliil!;! ' 


1 1  '    i  I 

III  I'"  f;  I; 

I  I  'i  II I  "'I 

,       In     '         h    I       '  lilt 

'    1  lli    I   "I 'I  i  I 


